MUSEUM  OF 
FINE  • ARTS 
BOSTON  irir 

t * ♦ MANUAL  OF  ITALIAN 

RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE  * * 
BY  BENJAMIN  IVES  GILMAN 
SECRETARY  OF  THE  MUSEUM 


INDEX  OF  NUMBERS 


No. 

Artist 

Page 

42 

Michel  Angelo  . 

. 170 

43 

do  ...  . 

• 143 

44 

Donatello  . . 

. 62 

56 

Donatello  (?) 

. 65 

57 

Donatello  . . 

• 63 

53 

XV  Century 

. 126 

59 

do  ...  . 

. 128 

96 

Ghiberti  . . . 

• 30 

1 19 

do  ...  . 

. 29 

120 

do  ...  . 

• 47 

124 

XV  Century . . 

. 125 

124M 

do  ...  . 

• 133 

126 

Orcagna  . . . 

. 22 

127 

do  ...  . 

. 22 

129 

L.  della  Robbia  . 

. 78 

130 

Donatello  . . . 

• 55 

I31 

do  ...  . 

• 59 

139 

do  ...  . 

. 64 

162 

do  ...  . 

. 65 

295 

Michel  Angelo  . 

• 154 

400 

XV  Century  . . 

. 128 

•3 

do  ...  . 

• 13° 

•5 

Verrocchio  . . 

. 109 

404 

N.  Pisano  . . 

• 7 

.1 

Michel  Angelo  . 

. 149 

.2 

Donatello  . . . 

• 55 

405 

XV  Century  . . 

. 127 

412 

Desiderio  (?)  . . 

. 101 

.1 

J.  della  Quercia  . 

• 25 

•3 

B.  da  Maiano 

. 120 

•4 

XV  Century  . . 

. 128 

413 

A.  della  Robbia  . 

. 84 

No.  Artist  Page 

41 3. i L.  della  Robbia  (?)  . . 80 

.6  Mino  da  Fiesole  . .116 

•7  Desiderio 100 

414  Pollaiuolo 104 

.2  A.  della  Robbia  ...  87 

•3  do 85 

.4  do  (?)  ....  88 

424  Mino  da  Fiesole  . .117 

436  N.  Pisano 9 

449  Verrocchio  (?)...  105 

450  Desiderio  (?)  ....  101 

458  do 101 

460  Donatello 61 

461  Verrocchio  . . . .108 

462  Mino  da  Fiesole  . .115 

463  B.  da  Maiano . . . .120 

464  Rossellino 98 

465  XV  Century  ....  126 

466  G.  Pisano 20 

467  do  (?) 21 

468  L.  della  Robbia  ...  68 

478  Rossellino  ....  96 

479  Civitali 123 

480  Verrocchio  . . . .111 

481  Donatello 57 

482  Ghiberti 29 

558  Federighi 92 

613  Michel  Angelo  . . .157 

614  do 157 

885  do 148 

897  do 145 

905  A.  della  Robbia  ...  89 


Other  numbers  refer  to  specimens  of  Italian  Renaissance  ornament 
described  on  pp.  173— 175. 


t 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2016 


https://archive.org/details/manualofitalianrOOgilh 


MANUAL  OF 

ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE 
SCULPTURE 


AS  ILLUSTRATED  IN  THE 
COLLECTION  OF  CASTS 
AT  THE 

MUSEUM  OF  FINE  ARTS,  BOSTON 

I 

BY 

BENJAMIN  IVES  GILMAN 

SECRETARY  OF  THE  MUSEUM 


MDCCCCIV 


COPYRIGHT  I904  BY 
THE  MUSEUM  OF  FINE  ARTS,  BOSTON 


All  rights  reserved 


THE  GETTY  CENTER' 

LIBRARY 


PREFACE 

One  of  the  wider  problems  of  the  history  of  fine  art 
is  that  of  its  intermittent  development.  Why  has  no 
sculptor  of  the  foremost  rank  appeared  in  Italy  since 
Michel  Angelo,  and  why,  when  Michel  Angelo  lived,  was 
Raphael  also  living?  May  genius  be  a matter  of  the 
heredity  of  a whole  people,  or  is  it  occasion  only  that  is 
lacking  in  times  of  artistic  depression  ? Why  should  not 
art  flourish  with  a measurable  continuity  ? Why  should 
it  always  blossom  and  decay  ? 

Be  the  cause  what  it  may,  the  works  of  sculpture 
of  which  the  casts  here  described  are  reproductions 
belong  exclusively  to  a short  period  in  the  history  of 
Italy  ; nor  is  it  an  arbitrary  choice  that  has  confined 
them  to  this  period,  but  the  fact  that  sculptures  of  equal 
merit  were  not  produced  there  before  and  have  not  been 
produced  there  since.  The  ruder  art  of  the  eleventh  and 
twelfth  centuries  in  both  northern  and  southern  Italy 
was  suddenly  succeeded  during  the  thirteenth  by  work 
far  higher  in  quality  both  of  skill  and  fancy.  In  northern 


IV 


PREFACE 


Italy  the  level  continued  to  rise  during  the  fourteenth 
century,  until  by  the  opening  of  the  fifteenth  it  had  at- 
tained a height  not  before  reached  since  the  Greeks. 
During  the  sixteenth  century  the  imaginative  power  of 
Italian  sculptors  rapidly  declined,  not  again  during  the 
three  hundred  years  that  have  since  elapsed  to  touch  its 
former  level,  even  in  sporadic  cases.  Of  this  brilliant 
period  in  all  the  material  arts  a few  only  of  the  most 
noted  names  are  represented  in  the  collection  here  de- 
scribed. To  gain  an  adequate  idea  of  what  Italian  sculp- 
ture was  at  its  best,  we  must  conceive  these  artists  sur- 
rounded by  a throng  of  others,  if  not  their  peers,  well 
worthy  of  association  with  them. 

It  is  apparent  to  every  eye  that  plaster  casts  are  far 
from  exact  reproductions  of  their  originals,  especially  if 
these  are  works  in  the  round.  Milton’s  lines 

“ Who  reads 

Incessantly,  and  to  his  reading  brings  not 
A spirit  and  judgment  equal  or  superior, 


Uncertain  and  unsettled  still  remains, 

Deep-versed  in  books,  and  shallow  in  himself,” 

apply  to  all  appreciation,  but  especially  to  that  of  fine 
art  seen  in  reproduction.  The  enjoyment  of  these  cold 


PREFACE 


v 


wraiths  of  life-like  originals,  the  grasp,  by  their  aid,  of 
what  the  artist’s  achievement  really  was,  demands  a 
power  of  attentive  vision,  a productiveness  of  plastic 
fancy,  whether  native  or  acquired,  that  is  already  the 
beginning  of  an  artistic  endowment.  Casting  is  by  no 
means  a completely  trustworthy  process,  both  through 
the  impossibility  of  producing  in  plaster  edges  as  sharp 
as  in  stone,  the  impracticability  of  delicately  following 
reentrant  surfaces,  and  the  difficulty  of  rejoining  with 
close  accuracy  the  various  fragments  of  which  a mould 
is  necessarily  made.  Furthermore,  a cast  is  of  another 
tint  than  marble,  another  color  than  bronze,  and  makes 
no  attempt  to  reproduce  their  frequent  coloring  and  gild- 
ing ; it  is  opaque  instead  of  semi-transparent  as  marble 
is,  and  has  less  sheen  and  less  intense  shadows  than 
either.  Of  the  total  effect  of  sculpture  photographs  must 
be  admitted  to  produce  at  least  as  much  as  casts.  Yet  the 
fragment  given  by  casts  alone,  consisting  in  the  volume 
and  the  variety  of  their  originals,  is  indispensable  to  the 
completer  comprehension  of  an  art  fundamentally  one  of 
the  sense  of  touch.  A photograph  does  not  give  the  size, 
and  above  all,  not  the  rotundity  of  sculpture ; it  is  more- 
over a single  view,  instead  of  the  indefinite  variety  of 
aspects  upon  which  the  artist  in  the  round  counts,  and 


VI 


PREFACE 


which  the  cast  repeats.  Through  their  limited  but  equally 
essential  scope  both  photographs  and  casts  may  be  said 
rather  to  illustrate  than  to  embody  the  works  they  repre- 
sent, and  to  illustrate  them  in  a complementary  way. 
Together  far  from  reproducing  their  original,  each  gives 
elements  the  other  lacks  : the  photograph  its  surface,  its 
sheen,  its  depth  of  shadow,  its  sharpness  of  line,  its  exact 
form ; the  cast  none  of  these,  but  alone  its  volume  and 
variety.  Nor  are  they  both  without  artistic  advantages 
compared  with  original  works,  in  that  they  can  be  be- 
held without  fatigue,  distraction,  or  limitations  of  time, 
under  the  best  conditions  of  light  and  approach,  and  con- 
fronted one  with  another.  Practically,  the  importance  of 
casts  to  a wider  and  closer  acquaintance  with  sculpture 
is  recognized  even  where  original  examples  of  the  art 
are  most  accessible,  — as  in  Dresden  at  the  Albertinum, 
in  Berlin  at  the  New  Museum,  and  in  Paris  at  the  Tro- 
cadero. 

The  study  of  Italian  sculpture  has  an  especial  claim 
upon  this  community,  and  in  particular  upon  visitors  to 
our  galleries.  The  late  Charles  C.  Perkins,  well  remem- 
bered in  Boston  as  a critic  of  unusual  quality,  Honorary 
Director  of  this  Museum  during  the  first  ten  years  of  its 
history,  was  one  of  the  earliest  investigators  and  writers 


PREFACE 


vii 


in  this  field.  Mr.  Perkins’s  “ Tuscan  Sculptors,”  published 
forty  years  ago,  but  nine  years  after  the  “Cicerone”  of 
Jacob  Burckhardt,  has  been  followed  by  a large  litera- 
ture, in  which  the  European  scholars  who  have  carried 
further  the  inquiries  of  his  day  invariably  mention  him 
with  high  appreciation  as  a pioneer  student  of  the  ori- 
ginal sources  of  their  subject.  The  gaps  that  years  have 
made  in  the  historical  fabric  he  wrought  with  the  best 
material  then  accessible  are  many  and  great ; but  upon 
what  is  left,  the  happy  expression  of  an  appreciative 
comprehension  of  the  art  he  studied,  time  has  no  hold. 
A comparison  like  that  of  Michel  Angelo’s  “Day”  to 
“ one  of  the  forms  which  fancy  shapes  in  the  clouds  ” 
would  not  have  occurred  to  a mind  unattuned  to  the 
thought  of  the  artist,  and  is  not  likely  to  be  forgotten. 

A book  like  the  present  must  always,  in  the  simple 
reading  of  it,  leave  an  unsatisfactory,  even  a tantalizing 
impression.  It  brings  us  near  to  interesting  things  with- 
out once  revealing  them ; forever  turning  to  something 
new  before  beginning  to  exhaust  the  old.  This  is  the 
unavoidable  result  of  the  purely  preparatory  nature  of 
all  verbal  comment  upon  art.  It  is  the  reader  of  these 
pages  who  must  satisfy  himself  by  closing  them  and 
turning  spectator.  Conceived  by  themselves,  as  inde- 


Vlll 


PREFACE 


pendent  architecture,  the  steps  of  a cathedral  would  like- 
wise mock  us  with  their  upward  gradation  leading  no- 
where ; yet  we  need  them  to  reach  the  portal  where  they 
mean  that  we  should  enter  and  forget  them. 


Boston,  January,  1904. 


CONTENTS 


NICCOLO  PISANO  ( about  1206-before  1284) 

404.  Relief  of  the  Adoration  of  the  Magi;  from 

the  pulpit  in  the  Baptistery  at  Pisa 7 

436.  Pulpit  in  the  cathedral  at  Siena 9 

GIOVANNI  PISANO  {about  1230-about  1320) 

4 66.  Statue  of  the  Madonna  and  Child;  from  the 

altar  of  Madonna  dell’  Arena  at  Padua 20 

(In  the  Style  of  Giovanni  Pisano) 

467.  Recumbent  Effigy  of  Enrico  Scrovegno;  from 

his  tomb  in  Madonna  dell’  Arena  at  Padua  ...  21 

ANDREA  DI  CIONE,  called  ORCAGNA  {died probably  in  1368) 

126,  127.  Two  Reliefs  from  the  Tabernacle  in  the  church  of 

Or  San  Michele  at  Florence 22 

The  Marriage  of  the  Virgin. 

The  Annunciation. 

JACOPO  DELLA  QUERCIA  {about  1374-1438) 

412.1.  Recumbent  Effigy  of  Ilaria  del  Carretto; 

from  her  tomb  in  the  cathedral  at  Lucca  ....  25 

LORENZO  GHIBERTI  {13^-1433) 

1 19.  Relief  of  the  Sacrifice  of  Abraham;  in  the 

Museo  Nazionale  (the  Bargello)  at  Florence  ...  29 

482.  Relief  of  John  the  Baptist  before  Herod  ; 

from  the  font  in  the  Baptistery  at  Siena  ....  29 

96.  Eastern  Doors  of  the  Baptistery  at  Flor- 
ence   30 

120.  Three  Reliefs  of  the  Miracles  of  St.  Zeno- 


X 


CONTENTS 


bius  ; from  the  front  and  ends  of  the  reliquary 
under  the  altar  of  the  chapel  of  St.  Zenobius  in  the 

cathedral  at  Florence 47 

DONATO  DI  NICCOLO  DI  BETTO  BARDI,  called  DONA- 
TELLO {1386-1466) 

404.2,  130.  Statue  of  St.  George,  and  Relief  of  St. 

George  and  the  Dragon;  from  a niche  on  the 
north  fa$ade  of  the  church  of  Or  San  Michele  at 
Florence ; the  statue  now  in  the  Museo  Nazionale  . 55 

481.  Relief  of  Herod’s  Feast;  from  the  font  in  the 


Baptistery  at  Siena 57 

131.  Relief  of  Dancing  Cherubs;  from  the  external 

pulpit  of  the  cathedral  at  Prato 59 

460.  Statue  of  David  with  the  Head  of  Goliath; 

in  the  Museo  Nazionale  at  Florence 61 

44.  Twelve  Reliefs  of  Singing  and  Playing  Cher- 
ubs ; from  the  high  altar  of  the  church  of  S.  An- 
tonio (II  Santo)  at  Padua 62 

57.  Relief  of  Christ  mourned  by  Cherubs;  in 
the  Victoria  and  Albert  Museum,  South  Kensing- 
ton   63 


139.  Bust  in  Relief  of  St.  John  the  Baptist  as  a 

Boy  ; in  the  Museo  Nazionale  at  Florence  ....  64 

(Attributed  to  Donatello) 

56.  Bust  in  Relief  called  St.  Cecilia;  in  the 


possession  of  Lord  Wemyss 65 

162.  Relief  of  a Lion’s  Head;  in  the  sacristy  of 

San  Lorenzo  at  Florence 65 

LUCA  DELLA  ROBBIA  {1400-1482) 


468.  Ten  Reliefs  of  Singing,  Playing,  and  Dan- 
cing Youths  and  Children  ; from  the  organ  loft 
of  the  cathedral  of  Florence ; now  preserved  in  the 
Cathedral  Museum 68 


CONTENTS  xi 

129.  Relief  of  St.  Augustine,  reading,  attended 
by  Two  Angels;  one  of  ten  panels  in  the  doors 
of  the  new  (north)  sacristy  in  the  cathedral  of  Flor- 
ence   ...  78 

(Attributed  to  Luca  della  Robbia) 

413.x.  Group  of  the  Visitation;  in  the  church  of 

S.  Giovanni  fuor  Civitas,  Pistoia 80 

ANDREA  DELLA  ROBBIA  {^SW-^SW  ) 

413.  Four  Reliefs  of  Infants;  from  the  fa9ade  of 

the  Hospital  of  the  Innocents  at  Florence  ....  84 

414.3.  Relief  of  the  Annunciation  ; over  the  door  of 
the  church  of  S.  Maria  in  the  court  of  the  Hospital 

of  the  Innocents  at  Florence 85 

414.2.  Relief  of  the  Meeting  of  St.  Francis  and 
St.  Dominic  ; from  the  Loggia  di  S.  Paolo  at  Flor- 
ence   87 

(Attributed  to  Andrea  della  Robbia) 

414.4.  Relief  of  the  Madonna  and  Child;  under  the 

portico  of  the  Accademia  delle  Belle  Arti  at  Flor- 
ence   88 

905.  Relief  of  the  Assumption  ; in  the  Metropolitan 

Museum  at  New  York 89 

ANTONIO  FEDERIGHI  {died  1490) 

558.  Holy- Water  Basin;  one  of  two  near  the  main 

portal  of  the  cathedral  at  Siena  92 

ANTONIO  ROSSELLINO  {1427-1478) 

478.  Relief  of  the  Nativity;  in  the  Museo  Nazio- 

nale  at  Florence 96 

464.  Bust  of  Matteo  Palmieri;  in  the  Museo  Na- 

zionale  at  Florence 98 


XIV 


CONTENTS 


the  Sacrament  in  the  church  of  Notre  Dame  at 

Bruges 148 

404- 1-  Statue  of  Moses  ; from  the  tomb  of  Pope  Julius  II 

in  the  church  of  S.  Pietro  in  Vincoli  at  Rome  . . 149 

295.  Head  from  One  of  the  Two  Statues  of  Cap- 
tives DESIGNED  FOR  THE  TOMB  OF  POPE  JULIUS  II ; 

in  the  Louvre 154 

614,  613.  Tombs  of  the  Medici  ; in  the  new  sacristy  of 

the  church  of  S.  Lorenzo  at  Florence 157 

Tomb  of  Giuliano  de’  Medici,  Duke  of  Nemours  ; 

with  figures  of  Night  and  Day. 

Tomb  of  Lorenzo  de’  Medici,  Duke  of  Urbino  ; 
with  figures  of  Evening  and  Dawn. 

(Attributed  to  Michel  Angelo) 

42.  Statue  known  as  Cupid;  in  the  Victoria  and 

Albert  Museum,  South  Kensington  ......  170 

DETAILS  OF  ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  ORNAMENT  173 

INDEX  OF  PLACES 176 


AIDS 


The  American  student  of  the  art  of  the  past  is  at  a disad- 
vantage through  his  remoteness  from  most  of  its  monuments. 
The  following  list  names  a number  of  aids,  both  pictorial  and 
literary,  to  the  study  of  Italian  Renaissance  Sculpture. 

Illustrations.  The  photographs  of  Fratelli  Alinari  in  Flor- 
ence, of  D.  Anderson  in  Rome,  and  others,  reproduce  all  the 
more  important  monuments.  The  great  work  of  Dr.  W.  Bode, 
“ Die  Renaissance  Skulptur  Toscanas,”  although  still  incom- 
plete, already  consists  of  nearly  five  hundred  folio  plates 
reproducing  photographs.  The  “ Klassischer  Skulpturens- 
chatz”  of  v.  Reber  and  Bayersdorfer,  completed  in  1900  in 
four  quarto  volumes,  embraces  the  whole  of  ancient  and  mod- 
ern sculpture  in  reproductions  on  a smaller  scale.  “ Das 
Museum,”  edited  by  W.  Spemann,  of  which  seven  volumes  in 
small  folio  form  are  now  complete,  the  eighth  year  being 
in  progress,  is  a collection  of  like  reproductions,  including 
both  painting  and  sculpture  from  ancient  times  to  the  present. 
All  three  of  these  publications  are  accompanied  by  a text. 
“ Kunstgeschichte  in  Bildern,”  published  by  E.  A.  Seemann 
and  completed  in  1902  in  five  folio  volumes  without  text,  gives 
smaller  reproductions,  many  from  photographs,  of  architec- 
ture, painting,  and  sculpture  from  classical  times  to  the  end 
of  the  eighteenth  century.  Valuable  for  its  illustrations,  even 
to  those  who  cannot  read  its  acute  and  well-informed  text,  is 
Kuhn’s  “ Allgemeine  Kunstgeschichte  ” in  three  large  octavo 
volumes,  now  nearing  completion. 

Books.  Giorgio  Vasari’s  “ Lives  of  the  Most  Eminent 


XVI 


AIDS 


Painters,  Sculptors,  and  Architects,”  first  published  in  1550, 
has  been  translated  by  Mrs.  Jonathan  Foster.  It  remains  the 
most  important  single  source  of  information  concerning  the 
artists  of  the  Renaissance  in  Italy.  Among  the  works  of 
Charles  C.  Perkins,  that  entitled  “ Tuscan  Sculptors  ” (2  vols. 
1864)  was  for  a time  the  principal  modern  contribution  to  its 
special  subject.  Luebke’s  “ History  of  Sculpture  ” has  been 
translated  by  F.  E.  Bunnett  (2  vols.  London,  1878).  The  brief 
“ History  of  Sculpture  ” of  Professors  Marquand  and  Froth- 
ingham  (New  York,  1896),  well  illustrated,  supplied  with  bib- 
liographical lists,  and  compactly  embodying  the  results  of 
modern  scholarship,  gives  several  chapters  to  the  Italian  Re- 
naissance. The  volume  by  L.  J.  Freeman,  “ Italian  Sculptors 
of  the  Renaissance”  (New  York,  1901),  contains  a series  of 
penetrating  studies  of  the  greater  sculptors  of  the  time.  The 
most  considerable  work  devoted  to  the  subject  within  recent 
years  is  that  of  Marcel  Reymond,  “La  Sculpture  Florentine,” 
published  in  four  small-folio  volumes  by  the  Messrs.  Alinari 
(Florence,  1897-1900)  and  richly  illustrated  by  reproductions 
of  their  photographs.  Neither  this  book  nor  the  convenient 
manual  of  Dr.  Bode,  “ Italienische  Plastik  ” (Berlin,  1893), 
has  yet  been  translated  into  English. 

Among  literary  aids  to  a more  extended  knowledge  of  Ital- 
ian Renaissance  sculpture,  consisting  of  documents  of  the 
time,  and  of  articles,  monographs,  and  general  works  based 
immediately  upon  these  and  upon  the  monuments,  mainly  by 
continental  scholars,  the  following  may  be  mentioned  : An  ac- 
count of  contemporary  writings  upon  earlier  Renaissance  art 
and  artists  in  Italy  is  given  by  C.  Frey  in  his  volume  upon 
one  of  them  entitled  “ II  Codice  Magliabecchiano  ” (1892). 
Other  records  of  the  time  are  “ Notizia  d’  opere  di  disegno 
nella  prima  meta  del  Secolo  XVI,”  first  published  by  Morelli 
in  1800,  reedited  by  G.  Frizzoni,  1884;  F.  Albertini,  “ Opus- 
culum  de  mirabilibus  novae  et  veteris  urbis  Romae”  (1510). 


AIDS 


XVII 


Letters  and  other  contemporary  documents  have  been  gathered 
by  Gaye,  “ Carteggio  inedito  d’  artisti  dei  Secoli  XIV,  XV, 
XVI,”  (3  vols.  1839)  ; Milanesi,  “ Documenti  per  la  storia 
dell’  arte  Senese”  (3  vols.  1854)  ; and  others.  Burckhardt’s 
“ Der  Cicerone,  eine  Anleitung  zum  Genuss  der  Kunstwerke 
Italiens  ” (guide  to  the  enjoyment  of  the  art  works  of  Italy), 
a work  of  genius,  first  published  in  1855,  has  become  in  suc- 
cessive editions  (8th,  1901),  through  the  collaboration  of  many 
scholars,  an  epitome  of  later  scientific  results  in  the  whole  do- 
main of  Renaissance  art  in  Italy.  In  the  three  richly  illustrated 
volumes  of  E.  Muentz,  “ Histoire  de  Tart  pendant  la  Renais- 
sance ” (1889-95),  the  fruit  of  both  learning  and  observation 
is  presented  in  sumptuous  form.  Other  general  works  are  the 
“ Catalogue  of  European  Bronzes  in  the  South  Kensington 
Museum,”  by  C.  Drury  E.  Fortnum  (1876)  ; Dohme,  “ Kunst 
und  Kuenstler  des  Mittelalters  und  der  Neuzeit,”  Vol.  Ill 
(1878);  Dr.  W.  Bode,  “ Italienische  Bildhauer  der  Renais- 
sance” (1887),  and  “Die  Florentinischen  Bildhauer  der  Re- 
naissance” (1902);  Zimmermann,  “ Oberitalische  Plastik  im 
fruehen  und  hohen  Mittelalter  ” (1897)  ; A.  Philippi,  “ Die 
Kunst  der  Renaissance  in  Italien  ” (1897)  ; L.  Couraj ' d,  “ Ori- 
gines  de  la  Renaissance”  (1901);  Symonds,  “Renaissance 
in  Italy  ” (1882).  Among  the  few  existing  monographs  of  im- 
portance upon  individual  sculptors  and  their  works  the  follow- 
ing maybe  mentioned:  Cornelius,  “Jacopo  della  Quercia” 
(1896);  Perkins,  “Ghiberti  et  son  ecole  ” (1886);  Semper, 
“Donatello  seine  Zeit  und  Schule  ” (1876),  “Donatellos  Le^ 
ben  und  Werke  ” (1887)  ; A.  Schmarsow,  “ Donatello”  (1886), 
v.  Tschudi,  “ Donatello  e la  critica  moderna  ” in  Rivista  sto- 
rica  Italiana,  IV;  Semrau,  “Donatellos  Kanzeln  ” (1891); 
W.  Voege,  “ Raffaelle  und  Donatello”  (1896);  A.  G.  Meyer, 
“ Donatello  ” (1903)  ; Cavalucci  et  Molinier,  “ Les  della  Rob- 
bia” (1884);  the  articles  of  Professor  Marquand  upon  the 
Robbia  in  the  American  Journal  of  Archaeology,  Vols.  VII, 


XV111 


AIDS 


VIII,  and  IX  (1891-94),  The  Brickbuilder,  1895,  1896,  1902, 
and  Scribner’s,  1893;  Cruttwell,  “Luca  and  Andrea  della 
Robbia  and  their  Successors  ” (1902);  and  C.  Yriarte,  “ Matteo 
Civitali  ” (1 886).  A good  brief  biography  of  Michel  Angelo 
is  that  of  Knackfuss  (1897)  m his  series  of  “ Kuenstlermono- 
graphien.”  The  latest  of  the  larger  lives  is  that  of  Symonds 
(2  vols.  1893).  That  of  H.  Grimm  was  translated  into  Eng- 
lish by  F.  E.  Bunnett  (2  vols.  1866).  Springer’s  “ Raffaelle 
und  Michel  Angelo  ” (1878)  constitutes  Vol.  IV  of  Dohme’s 
“ Kunst  und  Kuenstler  ” mentioned  above.  The  first  volume 
of  H.  Thode’s  work,  “ Michel  Angelo  und  das  Ende  der  Re- 
naissance,” appeared  in  1902.  The  correspondence  of  Michel 
Angelo  has  been  published  by  Milanesi  (1875  and  1890), 
and  his  poems  by  Guasti  and  by  Frey  (1897),  the  latter  of 
whom  in  his  “ Studien,”  published  in  the  Jahrbuch  der  Koe- 
niglichen  preussischen  Kunstsammlungen  XVI,  1895,  p.  91, 
and  XVII,  1896,  pp.  5 and  97,  gives  a partial  chronology  of 
Michel  Angelo’s  life.  Other  books  and  articles  having  to  do 
with  individual  sculptors  and  their  works  are  referred  to  in 
the  text. 

Among  books  upon  Christian  art  and  symbolism  may  be 
mentioned  : Lowrie,  “ Monuments  of  the  Early  Church  ” 
(1901),  with  a select  bibliography ; Mrs.  Jameson’s  well-known 
books  ; the  “ Dictionary  of  Christian  Antiquities  ” of  Smith 
and  Cheetham  (2  vols.  1876-80)  ; Didron’s  “ Christian  Ico- 
nography ” (English  edition,  1886);  Kraus,  “ Geschichte  der 
Christlichen  Kunst”  (Vol.  I,  1896);  and  Cabrol,  “ Diction- 
naire  d’archeologie  chretienne  ” (1st  part,  1903). 

The  periodicals  which  record  the  progress  of  the  study  of 
the  history  of  modern  art  are  very  numerous,  not  invariably 
continuous  in  publication,  and  very  often  short-lived.  Chief 
among  them  are,  in  Italy,  “ L’  Arte,”  formerly  “ Archivio  storico 
dell’  Arte  ” (Vol.  I,  1888),  “Arte  Italiana  decorativa  e indus- 
trial ” (Vol.  I,  1891),  and  “ Rassegna  d’  Arte  ” (Vol.  I,  1901)  ; 


AIDS 


xix 


in  France,  “ L’Art  ” (Vol.  I,  1875),  stiH  longer  established 
“Gazette  des  Beaux  Arts”  (Vol.  I,  1859),  and  “ Les  Arts” 
(Vol.  I,  1902)  ; in  Germany,  the  “ Repertorium  fuer  Kunst- 
wissenschaft  ” (Vol.  I,  1876),  and  the  “ Zeitschrift  fuer  Bil- 
dende  Kunst  ” (Vol.  I,  1866)  ; in  England,  the  “ Burlington 
Magazine  ” (Vol.  I,  1903)  ; in  America,  the  “ American  Journal 
of  Archaeology”  (Vol.  I,  1885).  The  annual  called  “ Gallerie 
Nazionale  Italiane,”  the  quarterly  “ Jahrbuchder  koeniglichen 
preussischen  Kunstsammlungen  ” (Vol.  I,  Berlin,  1880),  and 
the  “Jahrbuch  der  Kunsthistorischen  Sammlungen  des  aller- 
hoechsten  Kaiserhauses  ” (Vienna,  Vol.  I,  1883),  are  publica- 
tions under  governmental  auspices,  containing  extended  mon- 
ographs on  artists  and  artistic  monuments  ; and  similar  smaller 
bulletins  are  issued  by  some  individual  museums. 

The  “ Bibliography  of  the  Fine  Arts  ” of  Sturgis  and 
Krehbiel  (1897)  contains  many  useful  notes  upon  the  books 
mentioned,  while  the  “ Rassegna  bibliografica  dell’  arte  Ital- 
iana  ” (Vol.  I,  1897)  is  limited  in  scope  as  its  title  shows. 
The  new  “ Internationale  Bibliographie  der  Kunstwissen- 
schaft  (Vol.  I,  Berlin,  1902)  aims  to  take  account  of  all  more 
important  publications  in  all  languages  upon  every  branch  of 
art. 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE 
SCULPTURE 


In  crossing  the  threshold  between  the  gallery  of  Greek 
Vases  with  its  casts  of  late  Roman  sculpture,  and  that  of 
the  Italian  Renaissance,  we  pass  in  time  through  a mil- 
lenium.  From  the  day  when  in  Rome  the  sculptor  of  the 
sarcophagus  of  the  Niobids  laid  down  his  chisel,  until,  in 
Pisa,  Niccolo  and  his  aids  lifted  theirs  to  carve  a pulpit 
for  the  Baptistery,  more  years  went  by  than  separate 
the  earliest  sculptures  of  historic  Greece  from  the  latest 
products  of  Roman  times,  and  nearly  thrice  as  many  as 
were  to  be  occupied  by  the  revival  of  the  art  upon  Italian 
soil  in  which  Niccolo’s  is  the  first  distinguished  name. 

Nor  is  the  change  to  be  measured  by  the  flight  of 
time  alone.  A whole  world  vanishes  as  we  enter  the 
doorway,  and  a new  one  has  replaced  it  ere  we  emerge. 
The  two  worlds  are  those  of  the  visions  that  lay  nearest 
the  heart  of  European  civilization  during  the  two  histori- 
cal eras  to  which  they  belong.  Art  is  long,  and  to  do  the 
best  that  lies  in  them,  men  must  devote  their  lives  to  it. 
It  must,  unless  by  exception,  become  their  livelihood,  to 
be  gained,  like  any  other,  by  the  production  of  that  which 
their  fellows  will  buy.  Hence  it  comes  that  the  forms 
which  art  has  taken  in  the  past  are  chiefly  those  which 


2 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


artists  have  been  commissioned  by  others  to  give  it.  Espe- 
cially is  this  true  of  sculpture,  which,  as  the  fine  art  im- 
pressing shape  upon  resistant  material,  involves  processes 
both  long  and  laborious.  Like  architecture,  which  deals 
with  similar  material  to  ends  in  part  utilitarian,  it  is  even 
less  individual,  even  more  cooperative,  more  expressive 
of  the  genius  of  a whole  people,  than  their  sister  art  of 
painting.  Of  sculpture,  by  its  nature  dear-bought,  mas- 
sive and  enduring,  its  patrons  have  in  all  times  asked  the 
embodiment  of  sacred  themes,  those  of  affection,  of  pa- 
triotism, of  religion,  most  of  all  the  latter.  But  the  tasks 
which  it  has  been  set  in  Christendom  profoundly  differ 
from  those  by  which  it  developed  in  the  ancient  world. 
The  gods  of  paganism  were  corporeal  beings ; that  of 
Christianity  is  an  unseen  spirit.  As  music  is  the  charac- 
teristic art  of  modern  times,  so  sculpture  was  of  antiquity  ; 
for  of  all  arts  the  former  can  most  impressively  bring 
before  us  a disembodied  soul,  and  the  latter  a bodily  pre- 
sence. It  lay  in  the  natural  path  of  sculpture  to  express 
to  the  Greeks  the  highest  things,  for  these  to  them  were 
types  of  personal  perfection ; and  it  is  they  from  whose 
dismembered  remains  or  whose  reflections  in  copies  we 
now  infer  to  the  original  glory  of  the  art  in  Greece.  But 
sculpture  had  first  to  learn  how  to  image  to  the  eyes  of 
Christians,  even  remotely,  the  invisible  sanctities  of  their 
contrasted  faith. 

The  earliest  Christian  sculpture,  that  of  the  third  and 
fourth  centuries,  chiefly  sarcophagi,  made  use  of  still 
surviving  traditions  of  classical  art.  Based  upon  pleasure 


INTRODUCTION 


3 


of  the  eyes  $.nd  pride  in  life,  these  traditions  proved  ere 
long  inadequate  to  utter  the  contempt  of  the  flesh  and 
the  longing  for  a heavenly  world  with  which  Christianity 
had  fired  the  imagination  of  the  age.  The  statue  of  the 
Good  Shepherd  in  the  Lateran  Museum,  a product  of 
the  third  century,  personifies  a Gospel  allegory  in  an 
ideal  of  youthful  beauty,  as  it  were  a god  of  paganism 
given  a Christian  significance.  Yet  it  embodies,  not  the 
divinity  itself,  but  an  abstraction  ; and  the  dread  lest  this 
distinction  should  not  be  drawn  by  the  multitude,  active 
in  the  movement  to  which  we  owe  the  word  iconoclasm , 
eventually  closed  this  avenue  to  sculpture.  What  was 
left  of  the  plastic  impulse  served  the  new  faith  in  less 
ambitious  ways,  decorative  instead  of  monumental,  con- 
cealing its  poverty  in  the  richness  of  its  materials,  ivory 
and  the  precious  metals  instead  of  stone  or  bronze.  In 
this  ornamentation,  applied  mainly  to  church  furniture 
and  utensils,  the  sculpture  of  figures  and  groups  fulfilled 
a purpose  wholly  new, — that  of  imaging,  no  longer  a 
pantheon  of  superb  idealizations  of  human  endowment, 
living  lives  of  eternal  beauty,  but  men  imperfect  like 
ourselves,  the  dramatis  personae  of  situations  supposedly 
historical,  either  biblical  or  legendary  in  origin.  These 
motives,  chosen  for  the  lessons  they  conveyed,  often  in 
allegory,  were  jealously  restricted  by  ecclesiastical  author- 
ity to  approved  forms  — “probata  legislation  So  they 
carried  their  spiritual  burden,  they  might  be  and  soon 
became  of  the  rudest,  both  in  conception  and  execution  ; 
and  conventional  symbols,  the  cross,  the  monogram  XR, 


4 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


the  lamb,  the  fish,  the  peacock,  in  a measure  replaced  the 
imagery  of  a hampered  and  neglected  art.  But  the  joy 
of  the  sculptor  in  a message  well  delivered  in  carven 
forms,  and  in  their  own  charm  as  well  as  its  import,  sur- 
vived throughout  the  darkest  ages,  as  flowers  in  sheltered 
spots  bloom  through  the  winter.  Byzantine  sculptured 
ornament,  foliage  and  animals,  is  often  of  marked  beauty 
and  variety,  as  in  the  wreathed  border  of  the  episcopal 
chair  of  the  sixth  century,  at  Ravenna  ; and  the  vivid 
and  well-composed  ivory  reliefs  of  the  monk  Tutilo  in  the 
ninth  century  testify  to  his  artistic  sense,  as  his  repute 
does  to  that  of  his  contemporaries. 

Two  hundred  years  later  began  the  era  of  cathedral 
building,  and  at  length  reopened  the  way  for  monumental 
sculpture.  In  rearing  the  great  structures  of  the  eleventh, 
twelfth,  and  thirteenth  centuries,  workers  in  stone  ac- 
quired a skill  which  found  large  opportunity  for  more 
independent  use  both  without  and  within  them.  During 
the  latter  half  of  this  epoch,  the  portals  and  choirs  of 
churches  in  Germany  and  France,  notably  at  Wechsel- 
berg,  Freiberg,  Bamberg,  Naumberg,  Paris,  Amiens, 
Chartres,  and  Rheims,  were  magnificently  adorned  with 
figures  and  groups  in  the  round,  for  the  first  time 
worthy  of  comparison,  both  technically  and  in  independ- 
ence and  elevation  of  fancy,  with  classical  examples. 
Italian  sculpture  did  not  so  soon  profit  by  the  opportu- 
nities of  architecture ; and  when,  toward  the  end  of  the 
thirteenth  century,  works  of  similar  rank  began  to  be 
produced  in  Italy,  their  inspiration  proved  another  than 


NICCOLO  DI  PIETRO  PISANO 


5 


that  of  the  actual  existence  of  courts  and  market- 
places, where  the  northern  artists  found  the  noble 
forms  and  stately  draperies  they  perpetuated  in  stone. 
The  bridge-gate  built  by  the  Emperor  Frederick  II 
about  1240  on  the  Volturno  at  Capua,  fragments  of 
whose  sculptures  are  still  shown  there,  was  adorned  in 
emulation  of  Roman  examples  ; and  twenty  years  later, 
in  retracing  upon  the  panels  of  the  Baptistery  pulpit 
at  Pisa  the  outlines  of  antique  reliefs,  preserved  about 
the  cathedral,  relics  from  Roman  times,  or  booty  of  the 
Pisan  fleet,  Niccolo  Pisano  based  a Christian  art  upon 
the  classical  ideal  of  earthly  life  perfected. 


Niccol6  di  Pietro  Pisano  : born  about  1206,  died  be- 
fore 1284.  The  name  of  Niccolo  Pisano  first  appears  in  an 
inscription  upon  the  pulpit  of  the  Baptistery  at  Pisa  relating 
its  completion  by  him  in  1260;  and  a like  inscription  upon 
the  upper  basin  of  the  fountain  at  Perugia,  finished  about 
1280,  in  which  his  son  Giovanni  is  also  mentioned,  is  the 
latest  contemporary  record  of  him.  Documents  of  inter- 
mediate date  name  him  as  the  sculptor  of  the  sarcophagus 
in  the  monument  of  S.  Domenico  at  Bologna,  to  which  the 
remains  of  the  saint  were  committed  in  1267;  of  the  pulpit 
in  Siena  cathedral  finished  in  1268,  and  of  an  altar  in  the 
cathedral  at  Pistoia,  commissioned  in  1273,  but  of  which 
nothing  is  now  known.  Several  reliefs  over  the  left-hand 
portal  of  Lucca  cathedral,  upon  the  architrave  the  Annun- 
ciation and  the  Adoration,  in  the  lunette  the  Deposition,  be- 
tray his  immediate  influence,  if  not  his  hand. 


6 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


In  these  few  works  a commanding  individuality  asserted 
itself ; one  within  the  twenty  years  of  whose  activity  Italian 
sculpture  came  of  age.  The  carvings  in  stone  of  the  previ- 
ous century,  like  those  signed  Wiligelmus  in  Modena  and 
Gruamon  in  Pistoia,  seem  barbaric  and  childish  beside  the 
Pisan  pulpit ; and  if  it  have  to  show  no  revivification  of  an 
antique  type  more  admirable  than  the  bust  called  Sigelgaita 
Rufolo  upon  the  pulpit,  dated  1272,  at  Ravello,  nor  any  bit 
of  verisimilitude  more  accurate  and  better  expressed  than 
the  groups  of  parents  and  children  among  Antelami’s  portal 
sculptures  of  the  early  part  of  the  thirteenth  century  at  the 
cathedral  of  Borgo  San  Donnino  near  Parma,  these  rare  ex- 
amples show  only  that  like  ideas  and  capacities  were  already 
astir  here  and  there  in  other  natures  than  that  in  which  they 
had  their  fullest  fruition.  More  nearly  in  Niccolo’s  style 
than  other  contemporary  instances  (perhaps  the  work  of  a 
scholar),  are  the  reliefs  of  the  Virgin’s  life  from  Ponte  alio 
Spino  in  the  left  transept  of  Siena  cathedral,  with  the  stocky 
figures,  luxuriant  hair,  sweeping  drapery,  and  strong,  well- 
modelled  faces  familiar  in  both  pulpits  and  sarcophagus.  Of 
Niccolo’s  life  apart  from  his  sculptures  little  is  definitely 
known,  Vasari’s  full  details  of  his  achievements  as  an  archi- 
tect having  proved  untrustworthy.  A contemporary  docu- 
ment describes  his  father  Pietro  as  coming  from  Apulia,  but 
the  interpretation  of  this  record  is  uncertain,  and  the  more 
rigid  style  of  the  South  Italian  sculptures  of  the  time  is  in 
marked  contrast  with  the  free  and  apparently  independent 
imitation  of  the  antique  in  Niccolo’s  works. 

E.  Dobbert,  “ Die  Pisani  ” in  Vol.  Ill  of  Dohme,  “ Kunst 

und  Kuenstler  des  Mittelalters  und  der  Neuzeit,”  1878  ; 

A.  L.  Frothingham,  Jr.,  “The  Revival  of  Sculpture  in 


NICCOLO  DI  PIETRO  PISANO 


7 


Europe  in  the  Thirteenth  Century,”  Am.  J.  of  Archaeo- 
logy,  Vol.  I,  pp.  34  {.,  37 2 f. ; O.  Wulff,  review  of  W.  Hiaz- 
intow  u Die  Wiedergeburt  der  Italienischen  Skulptur  in 
den  Werken  Niccolo  Pisano’s,”  Moscow,  1900  (in  Rus- 
sian) ; Repertorium  fur  Kunstwissenschaft,  XXVI,  5, 
1903,  p.  428. 

404.  Relief  of  the  Adoration  of  the  Magi ; from  the 
pulpit  in  the  Baptistery  at  Pisa. 

Of  marble  ; the  pulpit  finished  in  1260. 

The  pulpit  at  Pisa  is  of  the  general  design  of  the 
later  one  at  Siena,  reproduced  in  the  cast  next  to  be 
described.  Hexagonal  in  shape,  it  stands  free  within 
the  circular  church,  each  of  five  faces  of  the  parapet 
adorned  with  a relief.  That  from  which  the  present 
cast  is  taken  is  the  second  in  order  from  the  entrance 
stairway,  the  first  representing  the  Nativity,  the  others 
the  Presentation,  the  Crucifixion,  and  the  Last  Judg- 
ment. In  his  conception  of  all  these  motives  Niccolo 
adhered  closely  to  ecclesiastical  tradition  ; but  in  their 
rendering,  the  half-symbolic,  careless,  or  helpless  indi- 
cation of  the  subjects  imaged,  with  which  the  church 
had  hitherto  contented  itself,  is  replaced  by  a far  from 
unskilful  representation  of  ample  and  majestic  pre- 
sences, in  attitudes  easy  and  measured,  with  faces  full 
of  dignity  and  repose,  and  clad  in  draperies  both  grace- 
ful and  true  to  reality.  This  remarkable  innovation 
betokens  the  full  possession  of  great  powers  and  rich 
experience,  and  in  its  frank  acceptance  of  classical 
ideals  amply  justifies  Niccolo  Pisano’s  fame  as  the  earli- 


8 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


est  representative  of  humanism,  the  harbinger  of  the 
Renaissance  in  Italy. 

The  Madonna,  clothed  in  flowing  drapery,  is  seated  at 
the  right  in  a chair  with  claw  feet,  and  holds  in  her  lap 
the  child,  who  grasps  a casket  presented  by  the  Mage 
kneeling  before  him.  The  second  Mage,  who  is  bearded 
like  the  first  and  of  the  same  facial  type,  kneels  behind 
him  ; the  third,  who  has  a smooth  face,  and  rounder, 
more  youthful  features,  stands  behind  the  two.  Their 
horses  appear  on  the  left,  two  prancing  with  arched 
necks,  the  third  with  down-stretched  head  and  pawing 
the  ground  as  if  snuffing  after  grass.  Above,  an  angel 
watches  the  group,  and  behind  the  Madonna  appears  the 
figure  of  Joseph.  The  influence  upon  Niccolo  of  the 
classical  models  he  had  before  him  in  ancient  sarcophagi 
at  the  time  built  into  the  outer  walls  of  the  cathedral, 
but  afterward  transported  to  the  Campo  Santo,  may  here 
be  recognized  in  the  noble  Junonian  face  and  pose  of 
the  Madonna,  a free  copy  of  the  Phaedra  in  one  of  these, 
in  her  dress,  and  in  the  Apollo-like  figure  of  the  young- 
est Mage,  whose  crown  is  a chaplet  of  flower  forms  in- 
stead of  the  conventional  ornament  used  for  his  compan- 
ions. The  other  reliefs  of  both  pulpits  follow  the  style 
of  later  Roman  times  in  a fault,  that  of  the  overcrowd- 
ing of  the  figures,  conspicuously  absent  in  the  present 
one,  which  in  its  composition  is  more  like  a reminiscence 
of  Greek  sculpture.  The  horses  are  remarkably  spirited 
and  realistic,  and  the  head  of  Joseph  a high  type  of 
manly  beauty.  The  drapery  of  the  first  Mage,  whose 


NICCOLO  DI  PIETRO  PISANO 


9 


stiffness  suggests  at  first  a less  skilful  hand,  may  be  de- 
signed to  represent  the  action  of  pressing  forward  upon 
one  knee. 

436.  Pulpit  in  the  Cathedral  at  Siena. 

Of  marble  ; executed  between  March,  1266,  and  Novem- 
ber, 1268. 

On  the  29th  of  September,  1265,  the  year  of  Dante’s 
birth,  in  the  Baptistery  at  Pisa,  under  the  shadow  of  the 
new  pulpit,  and  in  the  presence  of  two  of  the  cathedral 
councillors  who  had  commissioned  it,  Niccolo  Pisano 
signed  a contract  with  an  envoy  from  Siena  for  a similar 
pulpit  to  be  erected  in  Siena  cathedral.  By  March  of 
the  following  year  he  was  to  remove  to  Siena  with  his 
three  assistants,  Arnolfo,  afterward  the  architect  of  S. 
Croce  in  Florence,  Lapo,  and  a third  unnamed,  there  to 
remain  until  his  work  was  done  ; four  visits  to  Pisa  of 
a fortnight  each  being  allowed  him  each  year  in  the  in- 
terest of  his  personal  affairs  and  existing  engagements, 
but  not  for  new  orders.  A forfeit  in  case  of  any  failure 
to  fulfil  his  contract  guarded  its  due  performance,  and 
was  made  a claim  against  his  heirs  ; and  in  return  the 
Sienese  agreed  to  pay  him  at  stated  rates  for  the  mar- 
ble he  furnished,  and  for  the  labor,  food,  and  lodging  of 
himself,  his  aids,  and  his  horses,  and  exempted  him  from 
all  taxes  during  the  progress  of  the  work.  His  son 
Giovanni  might  accompany  him  on  half  pay.  The  out- 
come of  this  compact  was  the  completion,  within  two 
years  and  a half,  of  the  great  work  of  art  which  has 


o 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


ever  since  been  the  most  conspicuous  ornament  of  Siena 
cathedral. 

The  cast  reproduces  the  pulpit  alone,  without  the  elab- 
orate marble  stairway,  the  work  of  Bernardino  di  Gia- 
como, added  in  1543.  The  pulpit  is  octagonal  in  form, 
and  is  supported  by  nine  columns,  eight  at  the  angles  of 
the  octagon  and  one  in  the  centre.  Two  of  the  former 
rest  upon  lions,  one  devouring  a horse,  the  other  a stag  ; 
and  two  upon  lionesses  suckling  their  young.  In  the 
cast  the  last  three  animal  groups  are  not  reproduced, 
the  figure  of  a lion  devouring  a horse  being  repeated 
under  all  four  columns.  This  motive,  which  is  frequent 
under  the  pulpits  and  portals  of  Romanesque  churches 
in  Italy,  recalls  St.  Peter’s  comparison  of  Satan  to  a 
“ roaring  lion,  seeking  whom  he  may  devour,”  and  is 
thought  to  have  symbolized  the  victory  of  the  church 
over  the  powers  of  darkness.  Yet  it  is  found  also  in 
classical  sculpture,  as  in  the  lions  devouring  rams  on  the 
sarcophagus,  No.  58A,  in  the  Cortile  of  the  Vatican,  or 
the  lion  eating  a horse,  No.  195,  of  the  Sala  degli  Ani- 
mali.  All  the  columns  have  spreading  capitals  of  acan- 
thus leaves,  and  in  several  birds  perch  among  the  foliage. 
The  capitals  are  not  exactly  reproduced  in  the  cast,  which 
has  two  that  are  not  in  the  pulpit,  and  lacks  two  that 
occur  there. 

The  base  of  the  central  column  rests  upon  an  octago- 
nal drum,  on  the  faces  of  which  eight  figures  of  women, 
seated,  are  sculptured  in  high  relief,  portraying  the  lib- 
eral arts,  the  trivium  and  quadrivium  of  ancient  scholar- 


NICCOLO  DI  PIETRO  PISANO 


I 


ship,  one  of  the  earliest  representations  of  this  subject 
in  sculpture.1  The  first  of  the  trivium,  Grammar,  in- 
structs a child  from  a book ; the  figure  next  to  the  right, 
haggard  with  long  vigils,  is  Logic  ; next,  Rhetoric  proves 
her  point,  indicating  with  her  finger  the  confirmatory  pas- 
sage. The  trivium  is  separated  from  the  quadrivium  by 
the  figure  of  Philosophy,  the  sovereign  of  all,  dressed  in 
a magnificently  embroidered  robe  and  bearing  a flaming 
horn  of  plenty,  typifying  the  love  of  wisdom.  Next  fol- 
lows Arithmetic  counting  on  her  fingers,  Geometry  mea- 
suring upon  a tablet  with  compasses  (her  forearm,  hand, 
and  compasses  lacking),  Music  playing  upon  a harp,  the 
stretched  fingers  of  her  left  hand  perhaps  alluding  to 
the  mathematical  basis  of  her  art,  and  Astronomy  gaz- 
ing at  the  heavens  in  an  astrolabe. 

From  the  exterior  columns  spring  trefoil  arches,  the 
spandrils  of  which  are  filled  with  reliefs  representing 
prophets,  and  in  two  cases  perhaps  sibyls,  who,  according 
to  early  Christian  legend,  also  foretold  Christ’s  coming. 
In  the  cast  the  same  two  reliefs  of  prophets  are  repro- 
duced in  all  the  arches,  but  in  the  pulpit  itself  they  vary 
from  arch  to  arch.  At  the  angles  of  the  octagon  formed 
by  the  arches  eight  figures  of  women  are  placed,  four 
seated  and  four  standing.  These  represent  virtues, 
and  are  of  exceptional  beauty.  Of  the  five  called  car- 
dinal, the  Christian  virtue  of  Humility,  and  the  four  of 
Paganism,  Justice,  Prudence,  Temperance,  and  Forti- 

1 Paolo  D’Ancona,  “ Le  rappresentazioni  allegoriche  delle  arti  liberali 
nel  medio  evo  e nel  renascimento,”  L’  Arte,  V,  1902,  p.  219  ff. 


2 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


tude,  the  latter  may  be  identified  by  the  dead  lion  at  her 
side.  Of  the  three  theological  virtues,  Faith  is  recog- 
nizable by  the  scroll  with  “Fides,”  Hope  glances  up- 
ward, and  Charity  carries  a flaming  horn,  the  symbol  of 
love. 

Upon  the  arches  rests  an  octagonal  parapet,  bearing 
on  its  exterior  faces  seven  elaborate  reliefs.  Base  and 
summit  of  the  parapet  are  emphasized  by  rich  mouldings  ; 
but  at  the  angles,  instead  of  the  simple  lines  and  slender 
columns  of  the  previous  pulpit  at  Pisa,  eight  statues  or 
groups  are  placed.  The  whole  adornment  of  the  parapet 
thus  gives  the  impression  of  a continuous  relief  bent  into 
octagonal  shape,  and  emphasized  at  the  angles  by  masses 
of  sculpture  on  a larger  scale.  This  plastic  continuity  is 
a characteristic  of  the  separate  panels  themselves,  which 
in  general  represent  not  one  scene  but  several,  placed  in 
immediate  juxtaposition  and  sometimes  hardly  to  be  sep- 
arated. Their  subject  is  the  same  epitome  of  Gospel 
history  and  eschatology  that  in  more  condensed  form 
appeared  on  the  Pisan  pulpit,  the  angle  figures  and 
groups  referring  in  a measure  to  the  motives  of  the  pan- 
els they  separate. 

Beginning  at  the  right-hand  newel-post  of  the  entrance, 
the  angle  figure  is  that  of  the  Virgin  of  the  Annuncia- 
tion, and  the  adjoining  relief  is  devoted  to  scenes  from 
the  story  of  the  Nativity.  In  the  upper  left-hand  corner 
the  Visitation  is  portrayed,  to  the  right,  the  angels  sing  to 
the  shepherds,  below,  the  beasts  worship  at  the  manger 
beside  the  Madonna,  while  the  Christ  child  sleeps,  and  still 


NICCOLO  DI  PIETRO  PISANO 


13 


lower,  to  the  left,  Joseph  sits  watching  two  maids  bathe 
the  infant.  The  next  relief  represents  the  Adoration  of 
the  Magi,  the  intervening  angle  statue  being  a priestly 
figure  bearing  a book  and  perhaps  typifying  either  prophe- 
cies of  Christ  or  his  wider  Epiphany  through  the  preach- 
ing of  the  gospel.  Below,  on  the  left,  the  Wise  Men  are 
still  on  their  journey,  mounted  on  prancing  horses  and 
pointing  or  looking  forward.  Their  Eastern  origin  is  indi- 
cated by  the  camels  that  precede,  ridden  by  two  slaves 
with  woolly  hair  and  negroid  features.  Above  and  on 
the  right  the  Adoration  itself  is  imaged,  the  first  Mage 
kneeling  to  kiss  the  foot  of  the  child,  while  the  others 
behind  him  open  their  caskets.  The  Madonna  is  crowned 
and  veiled,  and  at  her  side  is  an  angel,  bearing  in  one 
hand  a fleur-de-lis,  symbol  of  the  Virgin’s  purity,  and 
with  the  other  pointing  to  the  babe.  On  the  left  three 
mounted  attendants  intently  watch  the  scene,  while  be- 
low, on  the  right,  another  holds  the  horses  of  the  Wise 
Men. 

The  next  angle  is  occupied  by  a statue  of  the  Virgin, 
standing,  with  the  babe  in  her  arms.  The  relief  beyond 
images  the  Presentation  in  the  Temple  and  the  Flight 
into  Egypt.  As  in  the  other  reliefs,  the  architectural 
forms  used  here  to  represent  the  temple  are  not  intro- 
duced as  an  actual  background  for  the  figures,  but  are 
unrelated  to  them  in  size  and  in  position,  and  only  sym- 
bolize the  theatre  of  the  scene  represented.  The  high 
priest  Simeon  holds  the  child  in  his  arms.  Behind  the 
Madonna  Joseph  appears,  carrying  the  “pair  of  turtle- 


14 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


doves  or  two  young  pigeons,”  brought  as  the  customary 
sacrifice.  Above,  and  on  the  right,  Herod  deliberates 
with  his  councillors,  while  in  the  centre  below  an  angel 
warns  Joseph  in  a dream,  and  to  the  right  the  Madonna 
and  child  are  seated  on  the  ass,  beside  which  Joseph 
walks  with  his  hand  on  its  bridle,  and  followed  by  an 
attendant  bearing  a whip  on  his  shoulder.  It  has  lately 
been  suggested  that  in  the  figure  appearing  above  Joseph 
in  the  Presentation,  Niccolo  Pisano  has  given  a portrait 
of  himself,  and  that  the  figure  occupying  the  like  position 
in  the  Pisan  relief  of  the  same  subject  fulfils  the  same 
function.  The  action  of  the  Siena  figure  pointing  at  the 
temple  before  which  he  stands,  gives  color  to  the  sup- 
position ; for  in  this  architecture  the  choir  walls  of  a 
large  church  have  been  removed  to  show  within  it  an- 
other building  resembling  the  Baptistery  at  Pisa  in  its 
original  form  before  its  completion  by  a Gothic  dome. 
This  curious  device  seems  chosen  to  convey  some  special 
meaning.  Further,  both  figures  are  less  typical,  more 
portrait-like  in  features  as  in  dress,  than  any  of  the  others 
in  either  relief,  with  the  possible  exception  of  one  just 
above  the  warning  angel  in  that  at  Siena,  whose  simi- 
lar clothing  and  corresponding  action  would  seem  to 
make  it  a pendant  to  the  supposed  portrait,  perhaps  that 
of  some  co-worker.  The  fact  that  this  obvious,  albeit  far 
from  certain,  interpretation  of  a singular  detail  in  this 
familiar  relief  should  not  before  have  been  proposed, 
is  an  illustration  of  the  gaps  that  still  exist  in  our  obser- 
vation of  even  the  most  important  monuments  of  art. 


NICCOLO  DI  PIETRO  PISANO 


15 


The  next  angle  is  occupied  by  a group  of  angels  blow- 
ing on  trumpets.  The  relief  beyond  represents  the 
Slaughter  of  the  Innocents.  In  the  upper  margin  Herod 
sits  attended  by  a councillor  and  two  soldiers,  and  with 
outstretched  finger  gives  the  word  of  command  for  the 
massacre.  The  sculptor  has  shrunk  from  no  violence  of 
attitude  or  facial  contortion  in  his  effort  to  express  the 
horror  of  the  event,  which  has  nevertheless  exceeded  his 
powers  of  representation,  and  doubtless  transcends  the 
limits  of  the  art.  The  poses  of  the  two  children  in  the 
lower  left-hand  corner  are  exceptionally  veracious  and 
beautiful. 

The  sculptures  at  the  succeeding  angle  are  full  of  sym- 
bolism. At  the  base  stands  a figure  of  Christ,  extraordi- 
narily realistic  and  perfect  in  attitude,  modelling,  and  ex- 
pression. From  his  right  side  issues  the  tree  or  stem  of 
Jesse  (a  representation  of  the  genealogy  of  Christ)  in  the 
form  of  a conventionalized  vine  which  bears  for  clusters 
human  heads  and  busts  (those  of  the  line  of  descent  from 
Jesse).  At  the  right  foot  of  Christ  are  a lion’s  whelp  and 
a monster,  half  bird,  half  snake,  in  allusion  to  the  verse, 
“The  young  lion  and  the  dragon  shalt  thou  trample 
under  foot.”  Appearing  beneath  his  left  foot  is  a gro- 
tesque head.  Above,  between  two  cherubim,  appears  a 
down-stretched  hand,  the  symbol  of  the  guidance  of  the 
Father,  and  below  it  a bird,  possibly  a symbol  of  the 
Spirit.  A representation  of  the  Crucifixion  occupies  the 
adjoining  panel.  The  cross  stands  upon  a pyramidal 
mound,  within  which  lies  a skull,  symbolizing  the  scene 


i6 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


of  the  Crucifixion  (Golgotha,  the  place  of  a skull).  On 
the  left  is  the  figure  of  John,  with  bent  head,  and  face 
distorted  with  grief  ; and  behind  him  the  Madonna  faints 
in  the  arms  of  her  attendants.  On  the  right  is  a group 
of  Roman  soldiery,  half  crouching  in  fear,  one  of  whom 
averts  his  face  as  if  hastening  away.  Of  the  figures 
above,  next  the  cross,  one  bears  the  sponge  and  the  other 
the  spear  (broken  off).  Behind  the  latter  appear  the 
heads  of  two  Jews  who  rail  at  the  sufferer.  The  upper 
margin  of  the  relief  is  occupied  by  angels,  one  holding 
what  appears  to  be  a ciborium,  perhaps  for  a chalice  to 
catch  the  blood  of  Christ.  Of  much  character  and  ver- 
ity is  the  enigmatic  figure  in  the  upper  right-hand  corner 
whom  an  angel  grasps  by  the  shoulder. 

At  the  next  angle  is  the  lectern,  formed  as  usual  by  an 
eagle  with  outstretched  wings,  the  symbol  of  the  Evan- 
gelist John.  The  symbols  of  the  other  Evangelists  appear 
beneath  ; an  angel  with  a book  (St.  Matthew),  an  ox  (St. 
Luke),  and  a lion  (St.  Mark).  These  symbols  are  the 
four  beasts  of  the  vision  of  Ezekiel  (chap,  i,  vv.  5 to  10) 
and  of  Revelation  (chap,  iv,  v.  7).  In  Jewish  tradition 
they  were  interpreted  to  signify  the  four  Archangels, 
or  the  four  major  prophets  ; but  early  in  Christian  his- 
tory they  became  the  distinctive  attributes  of  the  writers 
of  the  four  Gospel  narratives. 

The  last  two  panels  of  the  pulpit  represent  the  Judg- 
ment Day  ; the  group  at  the  angle  between  them  being 
that  of  Christ  seated  as  judge,  beneath  him  the  cross 


NICCOLO  DI  PIETRO  PISANO 


1 7 


supported  by  two  angels  carrying  the  instruments  of  the 
Passion,  and  above  on  either  side  two  cherubim.  The 
angel  on  the  right  carries  the  spear,  the  nails,  and  a 
scourge,  the  other  another  scourge,  and  the  crown  of 
thorns.  Both  are  noticeable  for  their  rich  priestly  dress. 
In  response  to  the  local  fondness  for  embroidered  stuffs 
shown  also  in  old  Sienese  paintings,  Niccolo  has  clothed 
many  other  figures  throughout  the  pulpit  in  the  costume 
of  the  time,  highly  ornamented.  The  right  hand  of 
Christ,  that  turned  toward  the  saved,  is  lifted  ; his  left 
hand,  toward  the  lost,  points  downward.  In  the  former 
relief  the  figures  are  arranged  in  regular  horizontal  lines, 
most  of  the  faces  being  turned  toward  Christ.  The  first 
is  that  of  the  Virgin,  crowned,  and  attended  by  three 
angels ; and  among  the  throng  which  follow  appear  pro- 
phets, warriors,  ecclesiastics,  noblemen,  and  gentlewo- 
men, a few  bearing  lamps.  In  the  lowest  line,  the  elect 
emerge  in  their  cerements  from  graves  or  from  tombs. 

The  regular  arrangement  and  the  quiet  attitudes  of  this 
relief  contrast  strongly  with  the  confusion  and  violence 
of  the  following  scene  of  condemnation.  Monsters  and 
imps,  dragons  and  serpents  of  frightful  form,  seize  and 
devour  their  victims,  who  appeal  for  mercy  or  struggle  to 
escape  in  vain.  Angels  with  mild  faces  but  implacable 
hands  aid  in  preventing  the  flight  of  the  doomed.  The  air 
of  weariness  and  boredom  in  all  the  devils,  especially  in 
the  horned  devil  at  the  right,  apparently  Beelzebub  him- 
self, is  most  marked,  and  would  seem  to  indicate  an  inten- 


i8 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


tion  on  the  part  of  the  sculptor,  or  his  ecclesiastical 
advisers,  to  admit  to  the  place  of  torment  no  satisfactions 
at  all,  not  even  devilish  ones.  The  horned  devil  lazily 
rests  his  hand  on  the  head  of  one  of  the  lost,  thereby 
aiding  the  dragon,  which  has  begun  to  swallow  him,  to 
accomplish  the  task.  At  his  feet  an  imp  with  knitted 
brows  bites  through  the  shoulder- joint  of  his  victim  as  a 
boy  might  bite  with  circumspection  at  a nut.  Crowned 
heads  and  priestly  robes  are  seen  among  the  lost,  and 
some  faces  compare  with  any  among  the  saved,  doubtless 
not  without  an  expressive  intention.  Two  are  conferring 
over  a scroll,  perhaps  signifying  a heretical  book. 

A group  of  angels  sounding  trumpets  of  doom  com- 
pletes the  circle  of  sculptures  on  the  pulpit. 

Compared  with  the  work  of  Niccolo  Pisano’s  predeces- 
sors in  Italy,  the  Siena  pulpit  represents  an  advance 
truly  wonderful  as  the  work  of  a single  man ; compared 
with  his  own  previous  effort  at  Pisa,  less  an  advance  than 
a change  in  artistic  intention.  The  technical  deficiencies 
of  his  earlier  sculptures  may  still  be  noted,  — the  squat 
proportions  of  his  figures,  and  their  disproportion  one  with 
another,  the  drill  holes  left  as  they  were  bored  (much  less 
noticeable  here  than  in  the  sarcophagus  at  Bologna),  the 
heavy  and  angular  draperies.  But  the  antique  models 
have  been  left  behind  ; and  the  sculptor  has  been  thrown 
upon  his  own  enthusiasm  for  what  is  beautiful  and  full  of 
meaning  in  the  tangible  world  about  him,  and  dramatic 
and  passionate  in  his  weighty  subject-matter.  In  its 
superabundance  of  significant  form,  in  its  abandonment 


GIOVANNI  PISANO 


19 


of  the  measure  of  the  earlier  work,  the  Siena  pulpit  is  a 
step  toward  the  art  of  his  son  and  successor,  Giovanni. 


Giovanni  Pisano:  lived  from  about  1250  to  about  1320. 
Although  Giovanni  Pisano  was  his  father’s  assistant  through 
many  years,  the  most  characteristic  works  of  the  two,  the  pul- 
pits at  Pisa  and  Pistoia,  could  hardly  be  more  different  in 
style.  The  simple  rounded  forms  and  the  peaceful,  naive 
expressiveness  of  Niccolo’s  sculptures  are  replaced  in  those  of 
Giovanni  by  angular  and  complex  modelling,  full  of  hidden 
and  impassioned  meaning.  The  spirit  of  the  coming  Re- 
naissance, its  frank  joy  in  the  life  of  the  senses,  no  sooner 
appeared  in  Niccolo  than  it  gave  place  in  his  son  to  the  spirit 
of  the  Gothic  north,  inclined  to  pungent,  even  painful  sensa- 
tions, full  of  emotionality,  and  tending  to  use  appearances 
mainly  as  the  vehicle  of  an  imaginative  burden.  The  poetic 
content  of  Giovanni’s  works  is  often  stormy  and  powerful, 
often  delicate  and  beautiful,  often  veracious  and  living,  but 
always  stirring  and  always  preponderant  over  their  charm  to 
the  eye.  Yet  his  neglect  of  the  technical  finish  that  marked 
the  works  of  Niccolo  was  doubtless  due  but  in  part  to  the 
ascendancy,  in  his  artistic  purpose,  of  suggestion  over  sense- 
impression  ; in  part  doubtless  it  resulted  from  the  difficulty 
and  multifarity  of  the  conceptions  that  thronged  from  his 
fancy,  which  he  had  neither  the  skill  nor  the  time  to  carry  out 
in  detail,  and  thus  either  sketched  or  left  to  subordinates. 
The  reliefs  on  the  fountain  at  Perugia,  the  last  work  of  Nic- 
colo,  are  full  of  the  evidences  of  Giovanni’s  cooperation.  His 
two  principal  works  are  two  pulpits,  that  in  S.  Andrea  at  Pistoia 
(1301),  his  masterpiece,  and  that  executed  for  the  cathedral 


20 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


at  Pisa  (13  n),  fragments  of  which  are  preserved  in  the  cathe- 
dral and  the  Campo  Santo.  Of  the  latter,  begun  in  1278, 
Giovanni  was  the  architect ; and  he  had  also  to  do  with  the 
building  of  Siena  cathedral.  . 

I.  B.  Supino  in  Archivio  Storico  dell’  Arte,  1895  f. ; L.  Justi  in 
Jahrbuch  der  K.  p.  Kunstsamml ungen,  XXIV,  1903,  p.  247  f. 

466.  Statue  of  the  Madonna  and  Child  ; from  the  altar 
of  Madonna  dell’  Arena,  Padua. 

Of  marble  ; probably  executed  shortly  after  the  erection  of 
the  chapel  in  1303.  A.  Tolomei,  “La  Cappella  degli 
Scrovegni  e 1*  Arena  di  Padova,”  Padua,  1881. 

The  Madonna,  standing  veiled  and  crowned,  and  clad 
in  an  inner  garment  gathered  at  the  waist  by  a cord,  and 
a fringed  mantle  clasped  at  the  breast  by  a brooch,  holds 
the  child,  seated,  fully  clothed,  on  her  left  arm,  and  turns 
toward  him  her  head,  poised  on  its  long  neck.  Her  atti- 
tude, sinuous  and  angular  as  a twisted  pillar,  exemplifies 
the  architectural  suggestiveness  of  Gothic  sculpture. 
The  child  has  a mature  face,  and  meets  his  mother’s  look 
of  fascinated  absorption  with  a glance  both  grave  and 
intelligent.  The  inscription  on  the  base  of  the  statue 
reads,  “ deo  gratias  opus  jonis,  magistri  nicoli  de 
pisis  ” (Thanks  be  to  God.  The  work  of  John,  son  of 
Master  Nicholas  of  Pisa).  It  is  thought  that  the  statue 
of  the  founder  of  Madonna  dell’  Arena,  the  Paduan 
Enrico  Scrovegno,  which  stands  in  a side  chapel  near  the 
altar,  may  also  be  the  work  of  Giovanni.  The  present 
group  may  be  compared  with  that  called  “Pisa,”  pre- 
served, with  other  remains  of  Giovanni’s  pulpit  for  Pisa 


GIOVANNI  PISANO 


21 


cathedral,  in  the  Museo  Civico  of  that  city ; and  with 
statuettes  of  the  Madonna  and  Child  in  the  cathedrals  of 
Pisa  and  Prato,  all  of  which  are  thought  from  his  hand. 

In  the  style  of  Giovanni  Pisano. 

467.  Recumbent  Effigy  of  Enrico  Scrovegno  ; from  his 
tomb  in  Madonna  dell’  Arena,  Padua. 

Of  marble.  The  will  of  Scrovegno,  who  died  in  1335,  states 
that  the  tomb  had  already  been  built. 

The  tomb  of  Scrovegno  consists  of  a sarcophagus, 
panelled  in  black  marble  and  ornamented  with  simple 
mouldings,  attached  to  the  wall  of  the  chapel  on  two 
stone  consoles,  and  bearing  his  effigy  in  a niche  above, 
with  marble  curtains  held  apart  by  statuettes  of  angels 
and  showing  at  the  back  three  shields  with  armorial  bear- 
ings. The  surface  on  which  the  effigy  lies  is  tilted  up  at 
the  back  so  that  the  face  looks  towards  the  spectator. 
The  tall,  spare  figure  lies  stretched  out  in  a pose  of  much 
truth  to  the  rigor  of  death,  with  the  head  fallen  to  the 
right  on  its  cushion,  the  hands  crossed  and  pointed  down- 
wards, and  the  feet  not  quite  symmetrically  placed.  The 
clothing  is  the  civil  costume  of  the  time,  a pointed  cap 
and  a plain  mantle  tight  fitting  at  the  neck  and  wrists, 
the  skirts  being  twisted  a little  uneasily  about  the  feet. 
The  scruples  of  present  criticism  over  assigning  this 
marble  to  Giovanni  Pisano  need  not  obscure  to  us  the 
fidelity  and  intelligence  with  which  the  author  of  one  of 
the  first  portraits  since  Roman  times  has  reproduced  the 
furrowed  features  and  veined  hands  of  the  overburdened 
man  of  affairs  who  found  his  last  resting-place  beneath  it. 


22 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


Andrea  di  Cione,  called  Orcagna  : died  probably  in  1368. 
There  were  two  great  masters  to  divide  between  them  the 
artistic  inheritance  of  Giovanni  Pisano,  and  to  add  to  it  of 
their  own  riches,  — the  painter  Giotto  and  the  sculptor  Andrea 
Pisano.  The  former  carried  still  further  Giovanni’s  exactitude 
of  observation  and  to  his  dramatic  vigor  added  simplicity 
and  restraint.  Andrea  Pisano,  at  once  pupil  of  Giovanni  and 
co-worker  with  Giotto  on  the  campanile  at  Florence,  learned 
from  these  two  to  image  a stirring  situation  in  the  fewest 
forms,  while  he  surpassed  both  in  his  knowledge  of  the  human 
frame  and  of  drapery,  and  crowned  his  works  with  a touch  of 
grace  and  beauty  all  his  own.  The  traditions  of  both  artists 
were  united  in  Orcagna,  a painter  whose  frescoes,  despite  their 
rigid  stateliness,  recall  the  simple  dignity  of  Giotto,  and  a 
sculptor  whose  reliefs  beneath  their  Gothic  angularity  reveal 
something  of  the  sweetness  and  delicacy  of  Andrea  Pisano. 
His  principal  work  as  painter  is  the  great  fresco  of  the  Last 
Judgment,  Heaven  and  Hell,  covering  the  three  walls  of  the 
Strozzi  chapel  in  S.  Maria  Novella,  in  Florence.  As  sculptor 
and  architect  his  monument  is  the  church  of  Or  San  Michele 
in  Florence,  whose  construction  he  supervised  and  to  which 
he  contributed  the  high  altar  in  the  form  of  a tabernacle  in- 
closing Bernardo  Daddi’s  much  revered  picture  of  the  Virgin. 

126,  127.  Two  Reliefs  from  the  Tabernacle  in  the  church 
of  Or  San  Michele  in  Florence  ; the  Marriage  of  the 
Virgin  and  the  Annunciation. 

Of  marble ; the  tabernacle  completed,  according  to  an 
inscription,  in  1359.  v.  Moeller,  “ Das  Stabbrechen  auf 
den  Darstellungen  des  Sposalizio,”  Repertorium  fiir 
Kunstwissenschaft,  XXV,  1903,  p.  288. 


ANDREA  ORCAGNA 


23 


The  sculptures  reproduced  in  the  present  casts  are 
two  of  the  series  of  eight  small  octagonal  reliefs  repre- 
senting scenes  from  the  life  of  the  Virgin,  which  Or- 
cagna introduced  about  the  base  of  the  tabernacle.  The 
subjects  of  the  others  are  the  Birth  of  the  Virgin  and 
her  Presentation  in  the  Temple,  the  Nativity  and  the 
visit  of  the  Wise  Men,  and  the  Purification  and  Death  of 
the  Virgin.  The  back  of  the  tabernacle  is  occupied  by 
a large  relief  of  her  Entombment  and  Assumption,  the 
most  considerable  work  of  the  sculptor.  The  present 
reliefs  occupy  the  front  of  the  altar,  the  Marriage  on  the 
left  and  the  Annunciation  on  the  right,  separated  by  a 
hexagonal  relief  containing  an  angelic  figure  symbolic  of 
one  of  the  Christian  virtues. 

The  Marriage  of  the  Virgin  is  represented  as  taking 
place  under  a canopy.  In  the  centre,  clad  in  the  robes 
of  his  office,  stands  the  High  Priest,  in  whose  left  hand 
the  right  wrist  of  the  Virgin  lies  in  maidenly  passivity, 
while  her  left  hand  hides  in  the  folds  of  her  dress.  Op- 
posite her  stands  Joseph,  carrying  over  his  left  shoulder 
the  suitor’s  wand,  whose  budding  over  night  in  the  Tem- 
ple into  leaf  and  flower  was,  according  to  old  legend,  the 
miraculous  sign  of  his  acceptance.  Although  the  Vir- 
gin’s head  is  deeply  inclined,  and  her  body  bent  back- 
ward, after  the  custom  of  Gothic  sculpture,  she  still 
overtops  her  betrothed.  Behind  the  High  Priest  ap- 
pear the  heads  of  four  witnesses  ; behind  Joseph  one  of 
the  rejected  suitors  breaks  his  wand  in  despair,  and  the 
other  lifts  his  hand  to  strike  his  successful  rival. 


24 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


In  the  relief  of  the  Annunciation  the  Virgin  is  seated 
at  the  right  upon  a dais,  clothed  in  a long  mantle  carried 
up  over  her  head  like  a hood,  and  with  her  arms  crossed 
upon  her  bosom.  A dove  flies  toward  her  from  above, 
and  the  angel  Gabriel  kneels  opposite,  holding  his  right 
hand  uplifted  and  bearing  upon  his  left  shoulder  a branch 
with  lily  buds.  His  long  locks  float  behind  him  as  if  he 
had  just  alighted.  In  Mary’s  lap  lies  an  open  book  in- 
scribed with  the  words  which  the  Bible  story  puts  in 
her  mouth,  “ ecce  ancilla  ” (Lo,  the  handmaid  of  the 
Lord),  and  two  other  books  lie  upon  the  bench  beside 
her.  She  is  again  represented  of  heroic  stature. 


Jacopo  della  Quercia:  born  about  1374;  died  at  Siena 
1438.  In  several  cities  of  central  Italy  there  exist  works  of 
sculpture  bearing  the  sign-manual  of  a distinguished  artistic 
personality,  which  although  they  date  between  the  works  of 
the  Pisans  and  their  still  more  distinguished  successors  in 
Florence,  give  no  sign  of  having  either  followed  the  former 
or  influenced  the  latter.  These  are  the  works  of  Jacopo  della 
Quercia,  Sienese ; born  perhaps  at  the  little  village  called 
Quercia  Grossa  near  the  city.  In  these  sculptures  the  poetic 
content  of  the  forms  has  been  enriched  by  an  expressiveness 
of  bodily  activity  and  power  novel  both  in  degree  and  char- 
acter. Their  exuberant  physical  attributes  and  their  volumi- 
nous draperies  separate  them  widely  from  the  severity  of 
Orcagna,  the  simple  charm  of  Andrea,  the  calm  grace  of 
Niccolo  Pisano,  or  even  the  passion  of  Giovanni.  Such  a 
conception  as  that  of  the  row  of  infantile  figures  surrounding 


JACOPO  DELLA  QUERCIA 


25 


the  sarcophagus  of  Ilaria  del  Carretto  and  bearing  in  many 
true  and  charming  attitudes  their  superabundant  garland, 
was  wholly  new  in  Italian  sculpture  ; and  the  suggestion  of 
supple  movement  in  the  reliefs  of  the  Fonte  Gaia  at  Siena 
was  hardly  surpassed  afterward  among  the  Florentines. 
Once  the  most  conspicuous  of  Quercia’s  achievements,  the 
Fonte  Gaia,  can  now  be  judged,  like  Giovanni  Pisano’s  Pisan 
pulpit,  only  by  dilapidated  fragments.  Not  time,  but  the  vio- 
lence of  enemies,  is  responsible  for  the  injury  suffered  by  the 
tomb  of  Ilaria  del  Carretto,  which  only  Italian  reverence  for 
beauty  saved  from  total  destruction  when  in  1429  her  tyrant 
husband,  Paolo  Guinigi,  was  expelled  from  Lucca.  The 
sculptures  about  the  portal  of  S.  Petronio  in  Bologna,  the 
font  in  the  Baptistery  at  Siena,  and  the  altar  of  S.  Frediano 
in  Lucca,  all  well  preserved,  complete  the  list  of  Quercia’s 
principal  works. 

412.1.  Recumbent  Effigy  of  Ilaria  del  Carretto  (died 
1405) ; from  her  tomb  in  the  cathedral  at  Lucca. 

Of  marble  ; executed  in  1406. 

The  tomb  of  Ilaria  del  Carretto  appears  to  have  been 
originally  placed  in  the  south  transept  of  Lucca  cathe- 
dral. After  her  husband’s  expulsion  it  was  taken  for 
safe-keeping  to  the  sacristy,  where  Vasari  saw  it  a cen- 
tury later.  In  1842  it  was  set  against  the  wall  in  the 
north  transept.  The  two  ends  of  the  sarcophagus  had 
been  lost  and  have  not  been  recovered,  and  until  1890 
one  side  also  was  missing.  In  that  year  the  Queen  of 
Italy  had  the  missing  side  brought  from  the  Uffizzi  Pal- 
ace in  Florence,  where  it  had  found  a resting-place,  and 


26 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


joined  to  the  tomb,  which  was  at  the  same  time  moved 
from  the  wall  and  set  in  the  middle  of  the  transept. 

The  figure  upon  the  tomb  is  that  of  a tall  and  beautiful 
young  woman.  She  is  clad  in  a long  mantle  without  orna- 
ment, girt  high  about  the  waist,  cut  open  at  the  shoul- 
ders, with  a high  curving  collar  and  with  flowing  skirts, 
which  are  draped  over  her  feet.  Upon  her  head,  resting 
on  two  cushions,  is  placed  the  headdress  called  a bour- 
relet,  embroidered  with  flowers.  Her  curling  hair  falls 
in  ringlets  over  her  forehead,  and  at  the  side  is  bound 
with  ribbons,  concealing  her  ears.  The  full  sleeves  of 
an  inner  garment  appear  through  the  openings  of  the 
mantle  and  are  gathered  into  tight  bands  upon  the 
crossed  wrists,  expanding  again  in  flowing  turnover 
cuffs.  Her  feet  rest  against  the  figure  of  a dog  crouch- 
ing upon  the  edge  of  her  drapery  and  looking  up  alertly ; 
the  image,  as  Vasari  says,  of  her  fidelity  to  her  husband. 

The  photograph  at  the  side  of  the  cast  shows  the  sar- 
cophagus and  the  line  of  genii  with  the  ponderous 
wreath. 


Lorenzo  Ghiberti  : born  in  Florence  in  1378  ; died  there 
in  November,  1455. 

In  the  year  1401  the  Guild  of  Merchants  in  Florence  de- 
termined that  the  northern  entrance  of  the  Baptistery  in 
that  city  should  be  adorned  with  a pair  of  bronze  doors  in 
the  style  of  those  which  Andrea  Pisano  had  executed  seventy 
years  before  for  the  main  portal  opposite  the  cathedral.  Ar- 
tists from  various  parts  of  Italy  competed  for  the  honor  of 


LORENZO  GHIBERTI 


2 7 


this  important  commission,  Jacopo  della  Quercia  among  them. 
The  prize  was  awarded  to  Lorenzo  Ghiberti,  then  a young 
man  of  but  twenty-three,  and  before  unknown  as  a sculptor. 
On  this  great  undertaking,  he  and  his  assistants,  among  them 
Donatello,  eight  years  his  junior,  were  engaged  during  twenty- 
one  years.  A few  months  before  the  doors  were  finally  placed 
in  position  the  commission  was  given  Ghiberti  to  execute  an- 
other pair  for  the  southern  portal,  the  style  in  this  instance 
being  left  to  his  own  choice.  Twenty-three  years  later  these 
also  were  complete,  and  in  the  opinion  of  the  cathedral  au- 
thorities so  far  surpassed  the  original  doors  of  Andrea  Pi- 
sano that  the  later  were  removed  from  the  main  to  the  south- 
ern portal  and  Ghiberti’s  installed  at  the  principal  entrance 
in  their  stead.  Beside  these  two  great  masterpieces  the  list 
of  Ghiberti’s  chief  works  includes  three  statues,  of  John  the 
Baptist,  St.  Matthew,  and  St.  Stephen,  for  niches  on  the  fa- 
cade of  the  church  of  Or  San  Michele  in  Florence  ; two  re- 
liefs, of  the  Baptism  of  Christ  and  of  John  the  Baptist  brought 
before  Herod,  for  the  font  of  the  Baptistery  in  Siena ; the 
reliquary  of  St.  Hyacinth  in  the  Museo  Nazionale  at  Flor- 
ence, and  that  of  St.  Zenobius  in  the  choir  of  the  cathedral 
at  Florence.  At  seventy-six  he  was  again  at  work  upon  the 
Baptistery,  having  received  the  commission  to  place  a frieze 
about  the  doors  of  Andrea  Pisano.  While  still  engaged  upon 
this  labor  he  died,  and  it  was  completed  by  his  son  Vittorio. 

In  the  works  of  Ghiberti  there  reveals  itself  once  more  an 
artistic  personality  original  and  gifted  in  the  highest  degree. 
His  application  of  perspective  to  relief,  his  use  of  an  orna- 
ment of  natural  forms,  resulted  in  effects  hitherto  undreamed 
of  in  the  art.  Representations  of  landscape  or  architecture 
in  sculpture  had  before  Ghiberti  been  either  symbolic  or  at 


28 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


most  fragmentary  in  character  ; but  in  his  hands  they  became, 
through  the  indication  of  distance  by  lessening  size  and 
roundness,  a potent  means  of  increasing  the  complexity  of  a 
relief  without  destroying  its  unity.  In  ornament  his  prolific 
inspiration  reflects  the  exhaustless  variety  of  the  fauna  and 
flora  about  him.  With  this  independence  in  the  choice  of 
method  he  combined  a capacity  for  the  invention  of  grace- 
ful form  that  has  rarely  been  equalled  in  any  age.  A similar 
sense  of  beauty  and  a similar  realistic  ornamentation  reap- 
peared in  the  terra-cottas  of  the  school  of  the  Robbia,  but 
pictures  in  bronze  as  impressive  as  Ghiberti’s  reliefs  have 
not  since  been  seen  in  sculpture.  Ghiberti  himself  has  not 
escaped  the  condemnation  always  visited  upon  any  artist 
who  chooses  to  adopt  a style  necessarily  less  fruitful  in  his 
own  art  than  in  another.  Effects  of  distance  are  not  a pure 
matter  of  form,  but  of  light  and  color  also,  and  can  be  repre- 
sented but  imperfectly  by  any  devices  of  modelling.  More- 
over, the  shadows  from  forms  in  high  relief  falling  on  forms 
in  low  relief  contradict  the  perspective  effect  aimed  at  by 
this  gradation.  Further,  in  enlarging  the  scope  of  his  repre- 
sentation to  cover  the  whole  visual  field,  Ghiberti  included 
many  objects,  trees,  sward,  cliffs,  clouds,  by  nature  lacking 
in  plastic  interest ; and  one  important  feature,  the  sky  itself, 
which,  wherever  represented,  is  but  an  empty  expanse  in 
the  composition.  Yet,  granting  that  in  Ghiberti’s  reliefs 
sculpture  attempts  a task  in  part  impossible  and  in  part  un- 
rewarding, it  is  still  true  that  the  genius  who  needed  the  ex- 
citement of  this  hopeless  aim  to  spur  him  to  his  highest  effort 
was  one  of  an  elevation,  a fecundity  and  a skill  capable  of 
turning  imminent  defeat  into  signal  victory. 


LORENZO  GHIBERTI 


29 


119.  Relief  of  the  Sacrifice  of  Abraham ; design  sub- 
mitted in  the  competition  for  the  northern  doors  of 
the  Baptistery  at  Florence.  In  the  Museo  Nazionale 
(Bargello)  at  Florence. 

Of  bronze  ; executed  1402. 

The  shape  of  the  design,  that  of  a panel  in  Andrea 
Pisano’s  doors,  was  prescribed  in  the  terms  of  the  com- 
petition. The  rocky  background  of  the  scene  represented 
forms  a prominent  feature  of  the  relief.  On  the  right 
Isaac  kneels  naked  on  an  altar  piled  with  fagots.  Abra- 
ham at  his  side,  grasping  him  by  the  shoulder,  poises  the 
knife,  the  flying  end  of  his  outer  garment  suggesting  a 
rapid  movement.  His  whole  pose,  whatever  of  arrange- 
ment it  may  betray,  still  expresses  the  gatheringof  force 
for  a relentless  thrust.  Above,  an  angel  bends  out  of  the 
sky  and  points  to  the  summit  of  the  crag  behind  Abra- 
ham, where  a ram  lying  down  seeks  to  disentangle  his 
horns  from  a growth  of  cactus.  Below  the  crag  two  at- 
tendants talk  together,  one  pointing  toward  Abraham  ; 
while  an  ass  stands  between  them  and  scratches  his 
neck  against  a jutting  rock.  Isaac’s  mantle  is  flung  on 
the  rocks  before  the  altar ; and  a lizard  crawls  beside  it. 

482.  Relief  of  John  the  Baptist  before  Herod ; from 
the  font  in  the  Baptistery  at  Siena. 

Of  bronze  ; finished  in  1427. 

The  portico  of  Herod’s  palace,  forming  the  background 
of  the  relief,  is  represented  on  a smaller  scale  than  the 
figures  grouped  within  and  before  it.  This  symbolic 


30  ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 

treatment  of  architectural  accessories  is  found  also  in 
the  first  Baptistery  doors,  which  Ghiberti  had  just  fin- 
ished. In  the  companion  relief  to  the  present,  that  of 
the  Baptism  of  Christ,  both  the  realistic  background 
and  the  varied  groups  of  many  figures  suggest  the  panels 
of  the  second  doors,  for  which  the  artist  had  already  re- 
ceived the  commission.  These  two  reliefs  from  the  font 
at  Siena  maybe  said,  therefore,  to  mark  the  turning-point 
in  Ghiberti’s  career. 

On  the  right  the  Baptist,  clothed  in  his  coat  of  camel’s 
hair  and  his  leathern  girdle,  stands  unmoved  amid  a 
group  of  soldiers,  and  stretches  upward  his  right  arm  in 
judgment  upon  the  king.  Herod  confronts  him,  wearing 
elaborate  armor  and  seated  with  Herodias  upon  a throne 
panelled  with  graceful  scroll-work.  Bending  forward,  his 
left  hand  upon  a mound,  or  globe  of  sovereignty,  with 
the  right  he  directs  the  seizure  of  the  prophet.  Herodias, 
in  a dress  and  cap  of  simple  drapery  without  ornament, 
gazes  toward  him,  her  hand  at  her  bosom  in  a movement 
of  resentment.  The  energetic  attitude  of  the  soldier 
about  to  execute  Herod’s  command  is  in  marked  contrast 
with  the  listless  grace  of  the  youth  beyond,  who  with 
the  remaining  figures  of  the  group  seems  to  have  little 
to  do  with  the  action. 

96.  Eastern  Doors  of  the  Baptistery  at  Florence. 


Of  bronze,  originally  gilded.  Except  on  the  more  exposed 
parts  of  the  sculptures  the  gilding  has  now  almost  entirely 
disappeared  under  a layer  of  the  accumulated  dust  of  cen- 


LORENZO  GHIBERTI 


31 


turies.  The  contract  for  the  eastern  doors  was  signed 
January  2,  1425.  On  the  24th  of  June,  1443,  Ghiberti 
announced  the  completion  of  six  of  the  reliefs,  and  in 
1447  that  of  the  remaining  four.  In  1451  the  authorities 
ordered  the  completion  of  the  ornamental  frieze  within 
twenty  months  from  February  1 of  that  year.  On  April 
2,  1452,  Ghiberti  received  the  order  to  gild  the  doors, 
and  during  the  summer  they  were  placed  in  position.  H. 
Brockhaus,  “ Forschungen  iiber  Florentinischen  Kunst- 
werke,”  1902.  “ Die  Paradiesesthiir  Lorenzo  Ghiber- 
tis.” 

The  cast  reproduces  the  whole  portal,  both  doors  and 
surrounding  frieze.  The  latter  occupies  a continuous 
panel  about  the  doorway,  and  consists  of  a succession  of 
clusters  of  fruit,  flowers,  and  leaves,  where  birds  perch 
and  a squirrel  crouches.  The  stems  of  the  clusters  are 
bound  by  ribbons,  and  two  spiral  scrolls  connect  them 
into  two  garlands,  each  springing  out  of  a vase  at  a foot 
of  the  panel,  and  upheld  at  the  corner  above  by  a massive 
ring,  while  the  two  join  in  the  centre  of  the  lintel  at 
another  ring,  from  which  an  eagle,  a device  found  on 
both  Ghiberti’s  arms  and  those  of  the  Guild  of  Mer- 
chants, stretches  its  wings  for  flight.  The  inner  surfaces 
of  the  doorway  are  occupied  by  arabesques  in  low  relief. 

Each  door  consists  of  five  panels,  separated  by  simple 
mouldings,  and  together  inclosed  in  a rich  border  con- 
taining, in  niches  above  and  below  the  panels  four  re- 
cumbent figures,  in  niches  to  right  and  left  of  each  panel 
twenty  standing  figures,  and  in  niches  at  the  corners 
of  each  panel  twenty-four  human  heads,  all  sculptured 
nearly  or  wholly  in  the  round.  The  intervening  spaces 


32 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


of  the  border  are  filled  with  designs  in  relief,  each  dif- 
ferent from  every  other,  those  above  the  standing  figures 
consisting  generally  of  conventional  scroll-work,  and  those 
below  generally  of  natural  flower  forms.  The  mouldings 
below  the  central  panels  of  the  doors  contain  the  inscrip- 
tion, “ LAURENTII  CIONIS  DE  GHIBERTIS  MIRA  ARTE 

fabricatum  ” (wrought  by  the  wondrous  art  of  Lorenzo 
Cione  Ghiberti). 

The  four  recumbent  figures,  with  the  air  of  antique 
river-gods,  are  apparently  of  allegorical  significance.  All 
the  statuettes  are  understood  to  represent  biblical  char- 
acters, and  many  of  them  may  be  identified.  The  row 
nearest  the  top  of  the  doors  contains,  in  order  from  left 
to  right,  two  prophets,  distinguished  by  their  scrolls. 
Esther  (?),  a figure  of  especial  charm  ; and  Saul  (?),  with 
sword  and  shield.  The  second  row  contains,  in  the  same 
order,  Amos,  in  the  dress  and  pose  of  an  antique  orator  ; 
Jonah,  grasping  a fish  ; Rachel  (?)  ; and  Samson,  one  of 
Ghiberti’s  rare  studies  of  the  nude,  with  his  left  arm 
about  a pillar  from  the  Temple  of  Dagon,  and  holding  in 
his  right  hand  the  ass’s  jawbone.  In  the  third  row,  Joel, 
recalling  the  St.  Stephen  of  the  front  of  Or  San  Michele, 
a figure  wholly  modern  both  in  its  expressive  pose  and 
its  complex  drapery ; Deborah,  with  the  scroll  symbol- 
izing her  prophetic  mission  ; another  prophet ; and  Jere- 
miah, with  his  finger  on  his  lips  and  bearing  a book.  In 
the  fourth  row,  Miriam,  with  her  timbrel ; Aaron,  in  the 
stately  attire  of  his  sacerdotal  office ; Joshua,  praying  to 
arrest  the  sun ; and  David,  in  full  armor.  In  the  lowest 


LORENZO  GHIBERTI 


33 


row,  Judith,  with  the  head  of  Holophernes ; and  three 
prophetic  figures. 

The  heads  in  the  intervening  circular  niches  are  of 
great  variety  and  truth  to  nature,  and  two  of  them,  ac- 
cording to  Vasari,  are  actual  portraits,  — that  of  Ghiberti 
himself  at  the  left  of  the  moulding  between  the  second 
and  third  panels  from  the  bottom  of  the  right-hand  door, 
and  that  of  his  stepfather,  Bartoluccio,  next  on  the  left. 

The  subjects  of  the  ten  reliefs  were  not  Ghiberti’s  own 
choice,  but  were  selected  for  him  from  Old  Testament 
history  by  the  jurist  Leonardo  Bruni  of  Arezzo,  at  the 
request  of  the  Florentine  authorities.  In  sending  the 
list  of  motives,  twenty  in  all,  with  eight  prophets,  to 
make  up  the  number  of  panels  in  the  earlier  doors,  Bruni 
wrote  they  had  been  chosen  both  on  account  of  their 
adaptability  to  artistic  embodiment  and  their  intrinsic 
importance ; and  added  that  he  wished  he  might  be  at 
hand  to  make  the  artist  comprehend  their  full  signifi- 
cance. Whether  in  the  desire  to  illustrate  this,  or  in  the 
development  of  ancient  traditions  of  his  art,  Ghiberti 
chose  to  unite  in  almost  every  panel  several  scenes  pre- 
senting different  moments  in  a single  story ; at  the  same 
time,  by  differences  in  the  size  and  relief  of  the  figures, 
and  with  the  aid  of  a background  drawn  in  perspective, 
giving  the  multifarious  forms  in  each  relief  a plastic  unity 
unattained  in  the  crowded  panels  of  his  predecessors. 
Even  when,  as  in  some  of  the  reliefs,  the  same  actors 
reappear,  it  is  generally  in  different  planes,  and  the  re- 
sulting poetic  disunity  in  the  composition  is  less  obtru- 


34 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


sive  than  in  earlier  art.  Ten  motives  were  finally  decided 
upon  : (i)  The  Creation  and  the  Fall  of  Man ; (2)  Cain 
and  Abel ; (3)  Noah  ; (4)  Abraham  ; (5)  Jacob  and  Esau  ; 
(6)  Joseph  and  his  Brethren ; (7)  Sinai ; (8)  Jericho  ; 
(9)  The  Battles  of  the  Israelites  ; (10)  King  Solomon  and 
the  Queen  of  Sheba.  These  subjects  Ghiberti  arranged 
in  their  chronological  order,  in  five  rows  of  two  each, 
beginning  with  the  topmost  panel  of  the  left-hand  door, 
which  contains  the  Creation,  and  ending  with  the  lowest 
panel  of  the  right-hand  door,  containing  King  Solomon 
and  the  Queen  of  Sheba.  In  their  treatment  he  chose  to 
employ  three  varieties  of  conception,  distinguished  by 
the  predominant  importance  given  respectively  to  land- 
scape, to  architecture,  and  to  the  representation  of  throngs 
of  persons.  Between  these  three  he  divided  the  ten 
panels  symmetrically,  the  four  uppermost  being  scenes 
out  of  doors,  the  middle  two  scenes  about  palaces,  and 
the  lower  four  scenes  of  public  ceremony  or  of  war.  The 
reliefs  thus  image,  perhaps  purposely,  three  stages  in 
the  history  of  humanity  : that  of  the  wanderer,  that  of 
the  settler,  and  that  of  the  citizen. 

The  scene  of  the  first  relief  is  a landscape  with  a grove 
of  tall  trees  on  the  left,  a rivulet,  representing  one  of  the 
four  rivers  of  Eden,  flowing  across  the  central  foreground, 
and  a high  portal  standing  alone  on  the  right,  the  frag- 
mentary representation  of  the  boundary  wall  of  the  gar- 
den. In  the  lower  left-hand  corner,  God  the  Father,  in 
the  person  of  a venerable  man  with  flowing  drapery  and 
long  waving  hair  and  beard,  grasps  the  hand  of  Adam, 


LORENZO  GHIBERTI 


35 


reclining  nude  in  the  hollow  of  a rock,  and  motions  him 
to  rise.  A group  of  four  angels  attends  the  Deity,  fold- 
ing their  wings  in  attitudes  of  submissive  and  adoring 
interest.  In  the  centre  Adam  lies  stretched  out  asleep, 
his  head  upon  his  hand  in  the  shadow  of  a hedge,  while 
the  figure  of  Eve  floats  from  his  side,  buoyed  up  by 
cherubs,  her  right  wrist  resting  in  the  left  hand  of  the 
Deity,  who  in  the  person  of  the  same  venerable  man 
raises  his  right  hand  to  command  her  appearance.  An- 
other group  of  angels  gather  above  with  outstretched 
wings  to  gaze  upon  her.  This  group,  actually  disposed 
upon  the  relief  in  the  form  of  a flat  arch,  Ghiberti’s  skill 
in  perspective  transforms  into  a horizontal  circle  which 
the  spectator  hardly  realizes  is  at  most  but  half  com- 
plete. In  the  left  background  the  serpent  is  coiled  about 
the  central  tree  of  the  grove,  and  turns  its  woman’s  head 
toward  Eve,  who  offers  the  apple  to  Adam,  standing  oppo- 
site, one  hand  deprecating,  the  other  accepting  the  gift. 
The  representation  of  the  devil  with  the  head  of  a wo- 
man appears  to  be  of  Anglo-Saxon  origin  (the  Venerable 
Bede  in  the  seventh  century)  and  recalls  the  Talmudic 
legend  of  Adam’s  demon-wife  Lilith,  the  predecessor 
of  Eve.  Above,  in  the  centre  of  the  relief,  the  Deity 
appears  descending  amid  clouds  in  a circular  nimbus, 
holding  a sceptre  and  attended  by  a retinue  of  angels. 
Before  him  there  flies  through  the  gateway  of  the  garden 
an  angel  with  four  wings  who  raises  his  hands  in  a men- 
ace against  the  guilty  pair  standing  without  and  prepar- 
ing to  fly. 


36 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


On  a height  at  the  left  of  the  second  relief  is  seen  a 
thatched  hut,  and  before  its  door  Adam  and  Eve  seated, 
clothed,  and  holding  one  the  spade,  the  other  the  distaff, 
which  are  the  emblems  of  their  fallen  condition.  By- 
Eve’s  side  one  baby  boy  plays  with  the  end  of  her  wisp 
of  flax,  while  his  brother  watches  him  from  his  father’s 
knee.  Below,  in  a nook  of  the  rocks,  Abel  sits  at  ease, 
his  staff  against  his  shoulder,  watching  the  flock  brows- 
ing before  him  amid  herbage.  As  in  the  reliefs  of  the 
Nativity  at  Pisa  and  Siena,  one  of  the  sheep  is  in  the  act 
of  scratching  his  ear  with  his  hind  foot.  By  Abel’s  side 
his  dog  sits  erect,  an  image  of  canine  fidelity.  In  the 
foreground  below,  Cain  is  ploughing  with  a yoke  of  young 
oxen,  who  twist  their  necks  impatiently  as  he  puts  his 
foot  upon  the  plough  in  beginning  a new  furrow.  A cleft 
in  the  rocks,  whence  a brook  issues  from  beneath  tall 
trees,  bounds  these  peaceful  scenes.  Beyond  it,  on  a 
mountain  top,  Cain  and  Abel  kneel  with  folded  hands 
beside  two  altars,  the  glance  of  Abel  following  the  flame 
ascending  from  his  offering  of  meat,  and  that  of  Cain 
fixing  itself  upon  his  offering  of  fruit  under  its  backward 
bending  flame.  From  the  sky  the  Deity  raises  two  fin- 
gers of  his  right  hand  in  blessing  on  the  one  sacrifice, 
and  with  outstretched  left  hand  warns  back  the  other. 
Below,  in  the  scene  of  the  murder,  Abel  falls  forward, 
his  hand  at  the  nape  of  his  neck,  while  Cain’s  bludgeon 
on  its  topmost  swing  seems  to  lift  the  murderer  well-nigh 
off  his  feet  as  he  hurls  it  forward  in  the  final  stroke.  In 
the  foreground  below,  Cain,  a figure  of  defiance,  tightly 


LORENZO  GHIBERTI 


37 


grasps  the  fatal  weapon,  and  raises  his  right  arm  in  a 
careless  response  to  the  questioning  Deity  in  the  sky 
above  him. 

In  the  background  of  the  third  relief  an  immense 
pyramidal  outline,  representing  the  ark,  rises  amid  a moun- 
tainous landscape.  Why  Ghiberti  should  have  chosen  to 
depict  the  ark  as  a form  rather  of  the  architecture  of  sta- 
bility than  of  the  architecture  of  buoyancy  is  a puzzling 
question.  From  a window  at  the  apex  of  the  pyramid 
birds  fly  in  all  directions,  and  through  a door  at  the  base 
the  family  of  Noah  emerge  with  gestures  of  wonderment 
over  the  scene  before  them.  A lion,  an  elephant,  and 
other  animals  have  preceded  them,  and  at  their  feet  lies 
the  body  of  a victim  of  the  deluge.  Below  on  the  right, 
they  are  again  seen  assembled  about  an  altar,  lifting  their 
hands  in  thanksgiving  and  prayer.  A bundle  of  fagots 
lies  ready,  and  a ram  stands  near.  From  the  sky  the 
Deity  sends  down  his  favorable  reply,  bending  from  a 
nimbus  surrounded  by  an  arch  of  angels  with  outspread 
wings,  the  symbol  perhaps  of  the  bow  in  the  clouds.  On 
the  left,  under  a vine-clad  arbor,  Noah  lies  in  a drunken 
stupor,  while  Shem  and  Japheth,  walking  backward  and 
carrying  between  them  a mantle,  prepare  to  hide  the 
disgrace  their  brother  Ham  has  witnessed  and  is  reporting 
to  them. 

The  fourth  relief  presents  two  scenes  from  the  story 
of  Abraham,  — the  appearance  of  the  angels  in  the  plains 
of  Mamre,  and  the  sacrifice  of  Isaac.  In  the  left  fore- 
ground Abraham  kneels  before  his  heavenly  visitants, 


38 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


and  with  uplifted  hands  begs  them  to  accept  his  hospi- 
tality. The  basin  of  water  for  their  feet  is  before  them, 
and  under  a tree  near  by  stands  the  table.  Sarah  appears 
in  the  door  of  the  tent  beyond,  holding  its  drapery  aside 
over  one  shoulder,  and  puts  forth  her  hand  to  second 
Abraham’s  appeal.  The  foremost  angel  inclines  his  head 
and  extends  the  forefingers  of  his  right  hand  in  blessing 
upon  the  suppliant.  In  the  central  background  of  the 
relief  rises  a grove  of  tall  pine-trees,  and  beyond  on  a hill- 
top the  youthful  figure  of  Isaac,  with  his  arms  pinioned 
behind  him  in  his  mantle,  crouches  upon  the  altar  under 
the  knife,  which  is  grasped,  as  Abraham  lifts  it,  by  an 
angel  descending  out  of  clouds  and  pointing  to  a ram 
lying  near,  caught  in  bushes.  Under  a thicket  at  the  foot 
of  the  hill,  out  of  sight,  two  servitors  while  away  the  time 
in  talk,  a sack  and  a jug  at  their  feet.  Before  them  their 
beast  of  burden,  a notable  example  of  Ghiberti’s  methods 
of  perspective  modelling,  drinks  at  a rivulet,  whisking 
his  tail,  and  turning  up-stream  toward  a fountain  issuing 
under  an  arch  of  rock. 

With  the  fifth  relief,  the  middle  panel  of  the  left-hand 
door,  the  background  changes  from  landscape  to  archi- 
tecture. The  scene  is  a stately  loggia  in  the  style  of 
Ghiberti’s  own  time,  with  Corinthian  pilasters,  round 
arches  receding  in  perspective,  and  a flat  roof.  The  sub- 
ject of  this  relief,  the  unlovely  story  of  Esau’s  fatuity  and 
Jacob’s  deceit,  failed  perhaps  to  inspire  the  artist ; cer- 
tainly it  did  not  furnish  him  with  motives  for  all  his 
figures.  The  group  of  serving  women  on  the  left,  plastic- 


LORENZO  GHIBERTI 


39 


ally  of  the  first  importance  through  its  high  relief  and  its 
suggestions  of  caressing  drapery  and  agile  movement, 
has  for  the  story  no  significance  at  all.  Of  enigmatic 
interpretation  are  the  figures  standing  on  the  roof  (Jacob’s 
dream  ?)  and  reclining  on  a couch  under  drapery  (the 
birth  of  the  brothers  ?).  The  remaining  groups  portray 
the  successive  steps  in  Jacob’s  usurpation  of  the  birth- 
right. Under  the  central  arch  Esau  drops  his  bow  and 
hastens  towards  his  brother  for  the  mess  of  pottage, 
which  is  to  be  the  price  of  the  rights  of  the  elder.  By 
the  left-hand  pillar  Isaac,  infirm  and  blind,  prays  his 
favorite  son  to  bring  him  venison  from  the  field.  The 
figure  of  Esau,  from  his  head  with  its  rich  crown  of  curls, 
to  his  feet  in  their  pose  of  boyish  diffidence,  is  an  ideal  of 
immature  grace.  His  two  dogs  follow  at  his  heels,  already 
nosing  after  their  quarry.  A glimpse  of  landscape  on  the 
right  shows  Esau  on  his  way,  with  his  bow  on  his  shoul- 
der. In  the  background,  underneath  the  right-hand  arch, 
Jacob  has  brought  Rebecca  the  kid  of  the  goats  which  is 
to  be  the  counterfeit  of  Esau’s  venison,  and  in  the  fore- 
ground kneels  with  constraint  at  Isaac’s  feet  to  receive 
his  benediction.  Rebecca  looks  on  intently  while  with 
his  left  hand  the  old  man  feels  of  the  goatskin  on  the 
smooth  of  Jacob’s  neck  and  raises  his  right  hand  in  bless- 
ing upon  the  deceiver. 

In  the  upper  background  of  the  next  relief  Joseph’s 
brethren  are  gathered  in  the  desert  at  a well,  about  to 
deliver  him  to  the  Midianites.  Lifted  above  the  well- 
curb  by  one  brother,  he  raises  his  arms  beseechingly, 


40 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


while  a second  points  him  out  to  the  chief  of  the  Midian- 
ites,  who  counts  money  from  a bag  into  the  hand  of  a 
third.  On  the  left,  two  attendants  of  the  chief,  and  a 
camel.  The  architectural  setting  of  the  scenes  below 
presents  in  perspective  on  the  right  a circular  colonnade 
or  open  market,  and  on  the  left  the  front  of  Joseph’s 
palace  (or  perhaps  an  apartment  therein,  disconnected  in 
Ghiberti’s  intent  from  the  colonnade),  both  in  the  early 
Renaissance  style  of  the  previous  relief.  Among  the 
arches  of  the  colonnade  attendants  pass  and  repass,  bear- 
ing sacks  of  grain.  In  the  right  foreground  a command- 
ing figure  (Joseph  ?)  watches  the  distribution  of  the  food. 
A camel  is  being  laden,  and  a youth  at  his  flank  strains 
at  a heavy  sack,  for  which  a second  holds  ready  the 
camel’s  saddle.  To  the  right  another  strokes  the  camel’s 
nose,  and  to  the  left  a mother  and  her  child  are  carrying 
away  their  share  of  grain,  in  a sack  on  the  woman’s  head 
and  a bag  in  the  child’s  arms.  The  lower  left-hand  corner 
of  the  relief  images  the  discovery  of  Joseph’s  drinking 
and  divining  cup  in  the  sack  of  the  youngest  brother 
Benjamin.  On  the  left  the  Egyptians,  all  wearing  tur- 
bans, and  two  with  long  beards,  led  by  the  steward  of 
Joseph’s  house ; and  on  the  ground  before  them  the  sacks, 
Benjamin’s  open  and  displaying  the  missing  cup.  While 
the  previous  group  of  the  distribution  suggested  none  of 
the  terrors  of  famine,  the  mien  and  attitudes  of  Joseph’s 
brethren  here  are  full  of  the  dramatic  expression  of  inno- 
cent distress.  One  rends  his  clothing,  another  hides  his 
face  in  its  folds,  another  looks  at  the  Egyptians  in  silent 


LORENZO  GHIBERTI 


41 


despair,  his  chin  upon  his  wrist,  another  tears  his  cheeks, 
others  stretch  out  empty  hands  in  mute  protestation, 
while  the  boy  Benjamin  stands  in  front,  holding  his  open 
palms  apart  and  gazing  fearlessly  up  at  the  accusing  stew- 
ard before  him.  In  the  background  above,  Joseph’s  tender 
revenge  upon  his  brethren  is  over,  and  clasping  Benjamin 
to  his  bosom,  he  holds  out  his  hand  to  the  rest,  one  of 
whom  lies  prostrate  before  him.  Two  figures  of  women 
at  the  foot  of  the  throne  form  a pendant  to  this  scene. 
A like  purely  plastic  function  in  the  relief  is  fulfilled  by 
the  tall  figure  in  the  central  foreground  holding  a bag, 
whose  stature  separates  him  from  the  adjacent  group  of 
Joseph’s  brethren  and  makes  him  the  symmetric  counter- 
part of  the  woman  with  her  child  opposite. 

Unlike  the  preceding  reliefs,  the  seventh  represents  a 
single  scene,  the  giving  of  the  law  upon  Mount  Sinai  in 
the  presence  of  the  children  of  Israel.  This  is  the  first 
of  the  four  devoted  to  episodes  in  the  national  life  of  the 
Jews.  But  for  a palm  and  a few  other  trees  the  landscape 
setting  is  rocky  and  barren.  In  the  background  on  the 
left,  the  encampment  of  the  Israelites  before  Sinai,  and 
below,  a body  of  water,  perhaps  representing  the  Red 
Sea.  On  the  right,  a mountain  where  Joshua  kneels  and 
hides  his  face,  while  Moses,  on  the  summit,  receives 
from  the  hand  of  the  Deity  the  two  tables  of  the  testi- 
mony. The  Deity  appears  in  the  same  stern  semblance 
and  with  the  same  large  retinue  of  angels  amid  clouds  as 
in  the  scene  of  the  Expulsion  in  the  first  relief.  Here 
the  foremost  angels  are  blowing  trumpets,  and  at  the 


42 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


appalling  sight  and  sound  the  people  gathered  below  lift 
up  their  hands  and  hide  their  faces  in  amazement  and 
terror.  These  movements  are  conspicuous  only  toward 
the  right  of  the  throng,  those  farther  away  appearing  to 
stand  quietly  together.  But  it  was  perhaps  Ghiberti’s  in- 
tention to  express  through  this  distinction  a crowd  both 
as  it  appears  at  a distance  when  the  individuality  of  its 
members  is  mainly  lost,  and  as,  when  approached,  it  opens 
up  and  reveals  separate  figures  of  varied  character  and  in 
divers  attitudes. 

The  eighth  relief  embodies  two  motives  : below  in  the 
foreground,  the  passage  of  the  Jordan  by  the  children  of 
Israel,  and  above  in  the  background,  the  march  of  Joshua 
round  the  walls  of  Jericho.  A gorge,  with  the  conical 
tents  of  the  camp  of  Israel  and  a thick  plantation  of 
trees,  separates  the  two  scenes ; and  the  dry  bed  of  Jor- 
dan divides  the  lower  into  halves.  From  the  left  bank 
Joshua,  in  a chariot  drawn  by  three  horses,  directs  the 
crossing  of  the  river.  Before  him  in  the  middle  distance 
priests,  bearing  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  halt  in  mid-stream 
until  the  people  pass.  In  the  foreground  the  hosts  of  Israel 
on  their  way  ; among  them  on  the  left  tribesmen  of  Reu- 
ben, Gad,  and  Manasseh  armed  for  the  impending  assault 
upon  Jericho  : and  on  the  right  representatives  of  the 
twelve  tribes  carrying  twelve  stones  from  the  midst  of  the 
river  for  a memorial  of  the  miraculous  disappearance  of 
its  waters.  In  front  of  the  tents  beyond  appear  groups  of 
spectators,  including  warriors,  elders,  and  women.  Along 
the  extreme  upper  border  of  the  relief  the  roofs  and  palace 


LORENZO  GHIBERTI 


43 


fronts  of  Jericho  rise  over  battlemented  walls  already 
seamed  and  falling  into  ruin  at  the  sound  of  Joshua’s  trum- 
pets. Below,  his  column  crosses  the  plain  before  the 
doomed  city,  led  by  seven  priests  blowing  on  trumpets 
and  a group  of  others  bearing  the  ark.  As  Joshua  halts 
and  with  a movement  of  his  staff  summons  forward  the 
multitude,  his  bust  frames  itself  in  the  gateway  of  the 
city  in  the  distance.  The  rereward  follows,  a crowd  of 
unarmed  men  with  women  and  children  ; the  warriors,  in 
the  Bible  story,  having  gone  before  the  trumpeters.  In 
these  rich  pictures  of  the  solemn  and  stirring  pomp  of  a 
nation’s  march  to  conquest,  Ghiberti  shows  his  equal  mas- 
tery of  a subject-matter  at  the  opposite  pole  from  the 
pastoral  dramas  with  which  the  series  of  reliefs  began. 

In  the  foreground  of  the  ninth  relief  an  actual  battle  is 
imaged,  in  the  background  the  triumphant  return  of  the 
victors.  From  the  gateway  of  Jerusalem,  represented  as 
a walled  city  crowning  a height  and  crowded  with  splen- 
did architecture,  a young  girl  with  a tabret  descends  to 
meet  David,  hastening  up  on  foot  with  the  head  of  Goliath, 
followed  by  King  Saul  on  horseback.  According  to  the 
Bible  account  of  this  crisis  in  Jewish  history,  the  women 
thus  came  out  of  all  the  cities  of  Israel,  singing  and  dan- 
cing, and  saying  to  one  another,  “ Saul  hath  slain  his 
thousands  and  David  his  ten  thousands.”  In  the  fore- 
ground the  two  signal  victories  that  gained  these  plaudits 
are  united  by  a poetic  license  into  one  battle-scene,  the 
middle  distance  being  devoted  to  the  rout  of  the  Ammon- 
ites, the  triumph  that  won  for  Saul  the  crown  of  Israel, 


44 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


and  the  extreme  foreground  to  David’s  later  combat 
with  Goliath  the  Philistine.  Toward  the  left,  on  the  bank 
of  the  brook  whence  the  smooth  stone  came  that  felled 
the  giant,  a crowd  of  Jewish  warriors  press  forward,  jos- 
tling one  another,  eager  to  see  his  end.  The  great  bulk 
of  Goliath  lies  prone  before  them,  the  spear  like  a weaver’s 
beam  at  his  side,  while  David,  kneeling  on  his  arm,  a 
shepherd’s  scrip  girt  round  one  shoulder,  and  sling  and 
staff  underfoot,  has  just  delivered  with  the  giant’s  own 
sword  a heavy  blow  at  his  neck.  The  dismay  of  the  Phil- 
istines at  the  fall  of  their  champion  is  indicated  in  a single 
figure  at  the  extreme  right,  turning  stealthily  away  and 
looking  back  with  frightened  eyes.  In  the  middle  dis- 
tance on  the  left,  Saul,  in  full  armor,  his  mantle  floating 
in  the  wind,  stands  in  his  chariot  amid  a circle  of  the 
upturned  faces  of  men-at-arms  with  battle-axes,  flanked 
by  dignitaries  on  horseback,  and  points  with  his  leader’s 
staff  toward  the  enemy.  Before  him  a line  of  horsemen, 
one  brandishing  a sword,  another  thrusting  with  a lance, 
plunge  onward  into  a confused  melee  of  poised  weapons 
and  the  heads  and  limbs  of  men  and  animals,  represent- 
ing the  actual  shock  of  the  battle.  A soldier  has  fallen 
between  the  ranks,  and  beside  him  an  Ammonitish  spears- 
man  aims  his  javelin  to  repel  the  attack  of  a figure  in 
full  armor  rushing  forward  on  the  Jewish  side,  his  battle- 
axe  flat  in  air  above  his  head,  the  ideal  of  a mediaeval 
warrior  in  the  heat  of  action.  His  mailed  foot  rests  on  the 
instep  of  a swordsman  striding  forward  behind  him  and 
looking  back,  all  unconscious.  A range  of  broken  hills 


LORENZO  GHIBERTI 


45 


divides  the  field  of  battle  from  the  umbrageous  valley  in 
the  background  leading  toward  Jerusalem. 

The  tenth  and  last  relief  has  for  its  single  subject- 
matter  the  manifestation  of  Jewish  glory,  in  the  person  of 
King  Solomon,  to  the  world  without,  in  the  person  of  the 
Queen  of  Sheba,  the  culminating  event  in  the  national 
progress  of  which  the  previous  reliefs  have  shown  the 
successive  steps.  The  scene  is  a terrace,  from  which 
flights  of  steps  lead  forward  and  downward  into  a fore 
court  and  upward  and  backward  into  an  open,  loggia-like 
temple  set  between  other  dignified  buildings.  The  two 
sovereigns,  clad  in  flowing  drapery,  stand  together  in  the 
middle  of  the  terrace,  the  king  holding  in  his  left  hand 
the  right  hand  of  the  queen,  whose  train  and  crown  are 
borne  by  attendants  behind  her.  Courtiers  range  them- 
selves on  either  hand,  the  men  near  by  on  the  terrace, 
and  the  women  in  two  groups  in  the  background  on  the 
steps  of  the  temple.  On  the  extreme  right,  musicians 
with  pipes,  cymbals,  and  drums.  In  the  left  background 
appears  a rectangular,  palanquin-like  construction,  with 
two  occupants,  whose  interpretation  is  not  evident.  Below 
the  parapet,  where  the  retinue  of  the  queen  mingle 
freely  with  the  people  of  Jerusalem,  the  scene  is  as  lively 
and  varied  as  it  is  dignified  and  ceremonious  within  the 
temple  area.  Two  children,  leaning  on  the  wall,  the  arm 
of  one  about  the  neck  of  the  other,  appear  to  find  this 
the  more  interesting  half  of  the  spectacle.  The  followers 
of  the  queen,  some  mounted  on  horses,  look  about  with 
gestures  of  astonishment  and  admiration  at  what  they 


46 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


see  ; two  find  interested  circles  of  listeners  to  their  stories 
of  far  countries  and  the  way  ; a third  bears  a falcon  on  his 
wrist,  a large  shaggy  dog  accompanies  a fourth,  and  on 
the  head  of  a fifth  a monkey  perches,  absorbed  in  the 
children  on  the  parapet.  From  this  vivid  transcript  of 
street  life  the  eye  wanders  gladly  back  to  the  stately  pair 
amid  their  train  upon  the  terrace,  and  to  the  quiet  tracery 
of  graceful  architecture  that  rises  and  bends  and  meets 
above  them,  greeting  each  element  of  the  work  with  equal 
satisfaction  in  its  turn. 

It  is  a fact  of  much  interest  that  the  architecture  of 
Solomon’s  Temple  in  this  relief  is  a suggestion  of  the 
interior  of  Florence  cathedral  as  it  would  appear  from 
the  entrance  of  the  Baptistery  opposite,  where  Ghiberti’s 
doors  were  about  to  be  placed;  but  a suggestion  with 
which  are  combined  not  only  features  of  the  biblical  de- 
scription of  the  Temple  but  variations  from  the  cathedral 
design,  which  as  titular  aid  to  Brunelleschi,  the  actual 
architect  of  this  new  wonder  and  pride  of  the  city,  Ghi- 
berti may  have  proposed  in  vain.  The  upper  chambers 
of  the  Bible  record  (i  Kings  ch.  v.)  here  appear  as  a 
triforium,  which  is  lacking  in  Florence  cathedral ; and 
from  the  size  of  the  onlookers  in  the  windows  it  is  plain 
that  the  biblical  measures  rather  than  the  much  greater 
dimensions  of  the  cathedral  are  here  imaged.  Further, 
it  is  apparently  the  shallow  proportions  named  in  the 
Bible  which  have  led  Ghiberti  to  simplify  his  perspective 
by  representing  a nave  of  two  bays  instead  of  the  four 
of  the  cathedral.  Independent  departures  from  its  plan 


LORENZO  GHIBERTI 


47 


are,  first,  an  additional  illumination,  which  will  be  ac- 
cepted as  an  improvement  by  those  to  whom  its  interior 
is  a dim  if  not  a gloomy  memory.  More  windows  are  in- 
dicated in  the  cupola,  and  those  of  the  apse  are  extended 
to  the  ground.  Again,  the  mixture  of  Gothic  and  Renais- 
sance forms  in  the  cathedral  is  replaced  in  Ghiberti’s 
temple  by  the  pure  Renaissance  style.  The  relation, 
apparently  intentional,  of  this  imaginary  architecture  to 
the  scriptural  temple  and  the  actual  cathedral  had  already 
been  lost  sight  of  in  Vasari’s  time,  and  has  but  recently 
been  called  to  the  attention  of  the  interested  ; another 
proof,  if  another  were  needed,  of  the  aptness  of  every 
age  to  study  the  art  of  the  past  through  literary  sources, 
rather  than  in  the  monuments  themselves. 

120.  Three  Reliefs  of  the  Miracles  of  St.  Zenobius ; 
from  the  front  and  ends  of  the  reliquary  under  the  altar 
of  the  chapel  of  St.  Zenobius  in  the  cathedral  of  Flor- 
ence. 

Of  bronze  ; cast  in  1446. 

The  contract  between  Ghiberti  and  the  cathedral  au- 
thorities for  the  reliquary  of  St.  Zenobius  was  signed 
April  18,  1439.  The  work  consists  of  an  oblong  box 
of  simple  design,  finished  with  plain  mouldings,  varied 
by  a row  of  dentils  along  the  upper  cornice,  and  adorned 
with  four  reliefs  on  the  four  sides.  The  relief  on  the 
back  represents  two  groups  of  angels  bearing  between 
them  a large  wreath  about  the  words  (in  Latin),  “ The 
head  of  St.  Zenobius,  in  whose  honor  this  beautifully 


48 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


ornamented  casket  was  prepared.”  During  the  seven- 
teenth century  the  remaining  bones  of  the  saint  were 
joined  to  the  head.  The  reliefs  of  the  front  and  ends 
depict  miracles  of  resurrection  wrought  by  Zenobius. 
The  general  likeness  of  these  panels  to  those  of  the 
second  doors  would  of  itself  serve  to  determine  their 
date  approximately,  even  were  they  not  otherwise  known 
to  be  the  work  of  Ghiberti’s  later  years ; while  the  ex- 
quisite elegance  and  precision  of  modelling  that  still 
characterizes  them  in  every  part  suggests  what  the 
doors  may  have  lost  in  these  respects  through  their  cen- 
turies of  exposure  to  the  weather. 

Zenobius  lived  between  the  years  334  and  415,  was 
an  ardent  defender  of  the  Nicene  Creed  and  vigorous 
opponent  of  Julian  the  Apostate,  and  being  recommended 
by  Ambrose  of  Milan  to  Pope  Damasus,  was  called  to 
Rome,  made  a deacon  of  the  Roman  Church,  and  finally 
consecrated  Bishop  of  Florence.  The  miracle  to  which 
the  front  of  the  reliquary  is  devoted  is  that  of  the  re- 
surrection of  a child  in  answer  to  the  saint’s  prayers.  A 
pious  woman  of  Florence  having  undertaken  a journey 
to  Rome,  intrusted  her  child  to  the  care  of  the  bishop. 
Just  before  her  return  the  child  died,  and  at  the  order 
of  Zenobius  the  body  was  brought  to  a public  place, 
where  in  answer  to  his  passionate  supplications  life  re- 
turned to  it.  The  scene  is  laid  outside  Florence,  which 
appears  amid  its  battlements  in  the  right  background. 
The  Baptistery  may  be  distinguished  within  by  its  py- 
ramidal roof,  and  on  the  hill  beyond  San  Miniato  is  seen 


LORENZO  GHIBERTI 


49 


at  the  head  of  its  long  stairway.  The  mountains  in  the 
left  background  are  true  in  form  to  those  about  Florence, 
and  the  church  in  the  centre  is  possibly  to  be  identified 
with  San  Spirito  or  S.  M.  del  Carmine  (both  since  re- 
built) across  the  Arno  on  the  road  toward  Rome.  The 
witnesses  of  the  miracle  are  gathered  in  an  open  space 
between  young  trees  in  two  groups  reaching  from  the 
foreground  on  either  hand  far  into  the  middle  distance. 
Between  them,  with  widespread  arms  the  mother  makes 
her  way  upon  her  knees  toward  the  child  supine  before 
her,  its  curls  flung  off  its  face  and  one  arm  thrown  back- 
ward over  its  head.  The  saint,  kneeling  opposite,  his 
mitre  on  the  ground  beside  him,  stretches  his  hands  to 
heaven  in  prayer.  Before  him  the  child  appears  again, 
standing  alive  with  folded  hands  and  earnest  look.  In 
this  rupture  of  the  poetic  unity  of  the  relief  at  its  cardi- 
nal point  (whether  this  figure  be  regarded  as  the  spirit 
or  the  bodily  presence  of  the  child)  Ghiberti  emphasizes 
anew  his  fidelity  to  the  nai've  traditions  of  his  youth 
and  of  his  predecessors.  Of  the  two  groups,  that  on  the 
left  is  conceived  in  attendance  upon  the  mother  and  that 
on  the  right  upon  the  bishop,  the  former  expressing 
in  gesture  and  attitude  their  sympathy  in  her  bereave- 
ment, and  the  latter  their  wonder  over  the  divine  favo*’ 
shown  Zenobius. 

The  relief  at  the  right  end  of  the  reliquary  represents 
the  resurrection,  through  the  bishop’s  prayers,  of  one  of 
two  messengers  sent  him  by  St.  Ambrose.  The  body  had 
remained  in  the  mountains,  the  survivor  bringing  the 


5° 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


news.  In  a region  of  rocks  and  trees  the  bishop  kneels 
by  the  side  of  the  victim,  who  lies  stretched  upon  the 
ground  amid  herbage.  On  the  left  the  other  messenger 
turns  away,  lifting  his  hands  and  looking  back  as  if  in 
sudden  horror.  The  strain  and  whirl  of  his  clothing  con- 
trast markedly  with  the  motionless  fall  of  the  drapery 
over  the  corpse  at  his  feet.  The  Deity  appears  in  a nim- 
bus above,  wearing  a bishop’s  mitre  and  mantle  instead 
of  the  flowing  drapery  and  cap  seen  in  the  doors,  and 
lifts  his  hand  in  blessing. 

The  relief  at  the  left  end  represents  the  restoration 
to  life  of  a boy  run  over  by  a cart  drawn  by  oxen.  The 
scene  is  in  the  fields,  a tree  and  crag  appearing  on  the 
right.  The  child  lies  under  the  massive  wheel  of  the 
cart,  which  the  oxen  continue  to  draw  onward  in  spite 
of  desperate  efforts  by  the  drivers.  On  the  left  a woman 
with  outstretched  arms  appeals  to  them  for  redoubled 
exertions.  Others  behind  her  give  themselves  to  lamen- 
tation, and  a boy  at  her  side  is  on  his  knees  in  prayer. 
The  saint  appears  beyond  the  cart,  throwing  up  his 
hands  as  if  in  joyful  thanksgiving  at  the  mercy  promised 
by  the  Deity,  who  descends  to  the  rescue  in  a nimbus 
with  trailing  clouds. 


Donato  di  Niccolo  di  Betti  Bardi,  called  Donatello  ; 
born  in  Florence  in  1386;  died  there  1466. 

Among  the  assistants  of  Ghiberti  upon  the  northern  doors 
of  the  Baptistery,  there  was  one  the  achievements  of  whose 


DONA  TELLO 


51 


independent  artistic  career  were  to  reveal  in  even  more  com- 
manding fashion  the  very  contrary  of  his  master’s  tastes  and 
aptitudes.  The  scene  of  Ghiberti’s  chief  activity  for  fifty 
years  was  the  quarter  circuit  of  a single  building,  and  he  died 
in  the  second  stage  of  his  journey  around  it,  at  work  in  the 
same  style  and  material  upon  the  doorway  opposite  where  he 
had  begun.  Donatello,  artificer  in  the  round  more  than  in 
relief,  of  tombs  and  monuments  as  well  as  statues  and  panels, 
and  in  stone,  wood,  and  clay,  as  well  as  marble  and  bronze, 
helped  adorn  not  only  the  baptistery,  the  cathedral,  and  Or 
San  Michele,  but  the  campanile  and  the  sacristy  of  San  Lo- 
renzo, made  at  least  one  journey  to  Rome  (1433,  perhaps  also 
1403),  spent  nine  years  in  Padua  (1444-1453),  several  in 
Siena  (1425,  1458-1461),  and  worked  also  in  Venice,  Mantua, 
Modena,  Ferrara,  and  Prato,  only  at  the  end  of  his  life  return- 
ing to  Florence,  to  leave  unfinished  at  his  death  two  pulpits 
for  the  church  of  S.  Lorenzo.  Ghiberti,  again,  revelled  in 
the  representation  of  floral  forms,  of  which  the  scantiest  use 
is  made  in  Donatello’s  work  ; and  figures  of  women,  evidently 
not  a subject  of  preference  with  Donatello,  a celibate  by 
nature  as  in  fact,  are  numerous  and  beautiful  in  Ghiberti’s 
reliefs.  Moreover,  the  exquisite  and  painstaking  finish  in  all 
Ghiberti’s  sculptures  is  as  characteristic  as  the  disregard  of  it 
in  most  of  those  of  Donatello,  and  the  inclination  of  the  one 
toward  ideality,  toward  things  as  we  would  wish  them  to  be, 
as  clear  as  the  inclination  of  the  other  toward  reality,  toward 
things  as  they  force  themselves  upon  us. 

It  may  be  questioned  whether  the  true  feeling  of  the  casual 
beholder  of  the  sculptures  attributed  to  Donatello  is  not  one 
of  wonder  that  works  very  commonly  unpleasing  in  subject 
and  not  infrequently  barbarous  in  execution  should  bear  so 


5 2 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


renowned  a name.  Yet  Andrea  della  Robbia  was  proud  to 
have  been  chosen  as  one  of  Donatello’s  pall-bearers,  Michel 
Angelo  praised  him,  was  by  Cellini  and  by  others  named  with 
him,  and  in  the  criticism  of  the  immediate  present  has  even 
been  rated  below  him.  It  is  true  Michel  Angelo  qualified  his 
praise  by  blaming  Donatello’s  lack  of  finish ; and  if  indeed 
his  work  partakes  of  the  nature  of  improvisation,  if  it  put  before 
us  the  unelaborated  result  of  an  initial  conception,  this  fact 
may  help  to  solve  our  wonder.  Inexhaustibly  prolific  of  plas- 
tic ideas,  the  new,  the  fresh,  the  untried  seem  alone  capable  of 
engaging  Donatello’s  independent  spirit ; hence  his  roving  life, 
his  many-sided  activity,  his  role  of  innovator ; hence  also  un- 
ripeness and  bizarrerie  in  much  that  he  produced.  Further, 
not  only  the  character  of  Donatello’s  work,  but  anecdotes  about 
him,  those  of  his  fatuous  St.  Louis  and  his  adored  “ Zuccone,” 
make  evident  that  with  him  effectiveness  of  expression  was 
the  controlling  passion,  both  its  vehicle  and  its  content  being 
secondary.  This  trait  is  the  “ terribilitk  ” of  subsequent  criti- 
cism : his  startling  vigor  of  representation  and  carelessness  of 
how  it  came  to  pass,  his  penetrating  intensity  of  verity  and 
indifference  to  what  he  revealed.  In  so  far  as  either  of  these 
two  inferences  is  justified,  it  points  to  a deficiency  in  Dona- 
tello’s artistic  personality.  For  he  who  leaves  incomplete 
leans  upon  the  imagination  of  the  spectator  ; and  he  in  whose 
art  expressiveness  is  consummate,  but  neither  its  matter 
worthy  nor  its  form  admirable,  fulfils  a necessary  but  not  the 
sufficient  condition  of  the  highest  artistic  accomplishment. 

But  only  as  casual  beholders  could  that  which  Donatello 
left  undone  blind  us  to  what  he  did.  The  critical  principle  of 
judgment  by  merit  rather  than  defect,  none  other  than  the 
counsel  of  common-sense  to  judge  by  what  is  rather  than  by 


DONA  TELLO 


53 


what  is  not,  nowhere  needs  more  emphasis  than  in  the  study 
of  Donatello.  To  weigh  his  real  capacity,  it  is  not  the  impish 
and  malformed  cherubs,  perhaps  his  in  conception  only,  in 
the  Prato  pulpit,  the  cathedral  organ-loft,  and  the  Paduan 
altar,  that  must  be  brought  in  evidence,  nor  the  forbidding 
Madonna  reliefs  ascribed  to  him,  nor  a prying  study  in  emacia- 
tion like  the  Magdalen  of  the  Baptistery,  nor  a figure  of  fun 
like  the  “ Zuccone,”  nor  the  bronze  Cupid  and  the  marble 
David  with  their  whimsical  dress,  nor  the  extraordinary  group 
of  Judith  and  Holophernes  at  Florence;  but  the  dreamy  and 
romantic  bronze  David  of  the  Bargello,  the  noble  figure  of 
St.  Mark  on  Or  San  Michele,  the  soldier  personified  in  the 
statue  of  St.  George,  the  half-oriental  fascination  of  the  Ma- 
donna at  Padua,  the  crucifix  in  the  same  church  by  which  he 
redeemed  his  ill  success  with  the  same  motive  at  S.  Croce,  the 
bust  of  Uzzano,  with  its  rough  intensity  of  life,  the  winning 
grace  of  the  Annunciation  at  S.  Croce,  the  dramatic  variety 
of  the  sacristy  doors  at  S.  Lorenzo,  the  overflowing  and  over- 
whelming tumult  of  the  loftily  conceived  scenes  on  the  pulpits 
of  the  same  church,  or  the  horse  and  rider  of  the  Gattamelata 
tomb  at  Padua,  whose  union  of  daring,  sincerity,  and  measure 
places  it  at  the  summit  of  his  art.  These,  with  others  like 
them,  make  up  a sum  of  work  whose  abundance,  originality, 
variety,  and  power  assure  to  Donatello,  all  deductions  made, 
a permanent  place  among  the  greatest  sculptors.  Before  him 
Italian  sculpture  was  mainly  an  art  of  relief,  ideal  in  its 
motives,  and  employing  draped  figures.  He  left  it  an  art  also 
of  statues,  of  portraiture,  and  of  the  nude,  enriching  it  in 
each  of  these  types  with  examples  which  remain  among  its 
masterpieces. 

An  apparent  crudity  in  many  of  Donatello’s  works  is  in 


54 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


reality  the  dextrously  calculated  exaggeration  demanded  for 
distant  effect;  for  a real  rudeness  in  others  his  assistants 
alone  are  responsible.  The  resolution  with  which  he  shaped 
his  figure  of  St.  Mark  to  produce  its  impression  at  the  intended 
height  brought  about  its  rejection  when  first  shown  upon  the 
ground ; and  the  same  bold  economy  of  ineffective  finish, 
recognized  and  admired  from  Vasari  onward,  is  found  in  his 
numerous  other  statues  for  the  campanile  and  Or  San  Michele. 
The  deep-set  eyes  of  the  “Zuccone,”  impressive  from  their 
niche,  appear  from  close  at  hand,  we  are  told,  as  if  dug  out 
with  a spade.  Likewise  the  genii  of  the  cathedral  gallery  and 
the  Prato  pulpit,  separately  far  from  satisfying,  unite  at  their 
proper  distance  into  a brilliant  and  charming  picture  of  child- 
ish movement.  The  setting  and  the  height  for  which  they 
were  designed  are  therefore  integral  elements  of  these  monu- 
mental works,  which,  as  gallery  objects,  in  general  fail  of  their 
intended  effect.  Again,  such  a mass  of  sculpture  as  that  for 
which  Donatello  made  himself  responsible  demanded  more 
than  two  hands,  however  rapid  and  busy  and  long  engaged. 
In  no  small  share  of  the  work  that  goes  by  his  name,  the  idea 
at  most  is  Donatello’s,  the  execution  at  least  that  of  far  in- 
ferior skill.  This  is  true  of  most  of  his  cherub  figures,  as  well 
as  of  all  four  of  the  tombs  counted  among  his  achievements 
(1425-1429),  those  of  Pope  John  XXIII  in  the  Baptistery 
at  Florence  ; of  Cardinal  Brancacci  in  the  church  of  S.  An- 
gelo a Nilo  at  Naples  ; of  the  scholar  Bartolommeo  Aragazzi 
in  the  cathedral  at  Montepulciano,  and  of  Giovanni  de’ 
Medici,  father  of  Cosimo  the  Elder,  in  the  sacristy  of  S.  Lo- 
renzo. His  chief  aid  in  these  works  was  the  architect  Mi- 
chelozzo, to  whom  and  to  other  assistants  they  are  now  in 
greater  part  ascribed.  The  small  relief  of  the  Assumption  on 


DONA  TELLO 


55 


the  sarcophagus  of  Brancacci  witnesses  to  the  refinement  of 
which  Donatello’s  own  chisel  was  capable.  Late  in  life  he 
was  unable  to  begin,  much  less  to  complete,  numbers  of  his 
thronging  commissions.  He  died  a pensioner  of  the  Medici, 
to  whom  his  faithful  allegiance  speaks  in  the  wealth  of  adorn- 
ment he  contributed  to  the  family  church  of  S.  Lorenzo,  and 
in  his  choice  to  be  buried  there,  near  his  lifelong  patron  and 
friend,  Cosimo  the  Elder. 

402.2  and  130.  Statue  of  St.  George  and  Relief  of  St. 
George  and  the  Dragon ; from  a niche  on  the  north 
fagade  of  the  church  of  Or  San  Michele  in  Florence ; 
the  statue  now  in  the  Museo  Nazionale. 

Of  marble  ; executed  about  1416. 

When  in  1406  the  Guilds  of  Florence  decided  to  orna- 
ment the  four  fagades  of  Or  San  Michele,  the  church 
they  had  built  seventy  years  before,  with  niches  contain- 
ing statues  of  their  patron  saints,  the  commission  for 
three  of  the  niches,  that  of  the  Guild  of  Weavers  with  a 
statue  of  St.  Mark,  that  of  the  Guild  of  Butchers  with  a 
statue  of  St.  Peter,  and  that  of  the  Guild  of  Armorers 
with  a statue  and  relief  of  St.  George,  fell  to  Donatello. 
The  statue  of  St.  George  has  been  removed  to  the  Museo 
Nazionale,  and  is  now  represented  by  a cast.  The  relief 
still  remains  in  its  original  position,  below  the  figure. 

The  statue  represents  a young  man-at-arms  standing 
bareheaded  with  feet  planted  well  apart,  and  resting  a 
narrow  shield  on  the  ground  before  him  by  the  point. 
His  legs  and  arms  are  protected  by  full  armor,  but  his 


56  ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 

hands  are  bare,  and  through  the  thin  tunic  that  he  wears 
the  modelling  of  his  body  is  visible.  A scanty  mantle  is 
loosely  tied  about  his  neck  and  falls  over  his  left  arm, 
the  tip  reaching  the  ground.  The  face  is  realistic  in  type, 
and  alive  with  bitter  ardor,  from  the  racehorse  nostrils 
to  the  knit  brow  and  widely  opened  eyes.  In  an  illu- 
mination that  dulls  some  of  its  intensity,  it  easily  be- 
comes animal  below  and  vacant  above,  the  mouth  and 
nose  speaking  of  bodily  instincts,  and  the  forehead  fur- 
rowing itself  in  an  unintelligent  frown.  The  living  imple- 
ment of  destruction  for  which  the  Guild  of  Armorers 
existed  stood  clearly  before  them  in  the  person  of  this 
well-grown,  loose-limbed  stripling,  wrought  by  the  sculp- 
tor with  unerring  naivete  out  of  many  memories  of  the 
mercenaries  of  his  time. 

The  relief,  which  shows  marks  of  its  long  exposure  to 
the  weather,  images  the  combat  of  St.  George  with  the 
dragon.  According  to  the  familiar  legend,  there  once 
lived  near  a Libyan  city  a dragon,  which  the  citizens 
kept  at  bay  only  by  daily  sacrifices,  first  of  their  flocks 
and  then  of  their  children.  On  the  day  the  lot  finally 
fell  on  the  king’s  daughter,  St.  George,  passing  by  and 
wondering  at  her  tears,  encountered  the  beast,  transfixed 
him  with  his  lance,  led  him  back  to  the  city  with  the 
princess,  and  there  decapitated  him  before  all  the  people. 
In  the  relief  St.  George  is  on  horseback,  in  the  act  of 
thrusting  the  dragon  through  the  neck,  while  the  prin- 
cess, a figure  full  of  grace  but  of  a rustic  sturdiness  of 
build,  stands  near  in  an  attitude  of  surprise  and  suspense. 


DONA  TELLO 


57 


There  is  a lift  and  swing  in  both  the  horse  and  his  rider 
to  which  the  somewhat  petty  dragon  seems  hardly  equal 
to  opposing  adequate  resistance.  The  stocky  proportions 
of  the  two  human  figures,  and  the  comparative  empti- 
ness of  the  relief  as  a whole,  suggest  the  limitations  of 
the  long  and  low  field  at  the  artist’s  command  for  his 
simple  motive.  A background  appearing  at  present  to 
have  been  indicated  rather  than  elaborated  shows  on  the 
left  the  dragon’s  den,  on  the  right  a palace,  and  toward 
the  centre  forms  of  trees  signifying  a wilderness. 

481.  Relief  of  Herod’s  Feast ; from  the  font  in  the  Bap- 
tistery at  Siena. 

Of  bronze  ; completed  1425. 

The  old  font  in  the  Baptistery  at  Siena  had  long  been 
considered  a disgrace  to  the  community  (“  sozzo  e vitu- 
peroso  ”)  when  in  1416  the  cathedral  authorities  yielded 
to  the  citizens’  demand  for  a new  one,  and  commissioned 
Jacopo  della  Quercia  to  build  the  present  hexagonal  basin 
of  marble.  Of  the  six  bronze  reliefs  which  were  to  orna- 
ment it  two  were  intrusted  to  him  in  a contract  of  1417, 
and  by  1419  one  of  them  appears  to  have  been  nearly 
completed.  But  the  multiplicity  of  Quercia’s  engage- 
ments led  to  long  delays  with  the  other,  and  at  last  the 
cathedral  account-book  records,  under  date  of  August 
18/1425,  a payment  to  Donatello  of  Florence,  “who  has 
made  for  us  one  of  the  two  subjects  that  were  assigned 
to  Master  Jacopo.”  This  was  the  relief  of  Herod’s  feast. 

The  suggestion  for  the  elaborate  perspective  back- 


58 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


ground  of  this  relief,  and  for  the  grouping  of  figures 
within  it  by  rounder  or  flatter  modelling,  was  not  received 
from  Ghiberti,  whose  intricate  bronzes  for  the  second 
Baptistery  doors  were  only  just  begun,  but  very  proba- 
bly came  from  Quercia,  whose  single  contribution  to  the 
hexagon,  the  relief  of  “ Zacharias  in  the  Temple/’  shows 
likewise  a vista  of  round  arches,  one  partly  walled  up  as 
they  are  here,  and  giving  a view  of  figures  in  low  relief 
beyond.  It  is  even  argued  that  a minor  peculiarity  of  the 
faces  in  “ Herod’s  feast,”  the  thickening  of  the  brow  at 
the  root  of  the  nose,  was  borrowed  from  Quercia,  in  all 
whose  later  work  it  appears,  while  hardly  before  and  sel- 
dom afterward  in  that  of  Donatello.  Yet  the  immaculate 
architecture  and  faultless  figures  of  the  “ Zacharias  ” 
relief  become  in  “ Herod’s  feast”  palaces  and  people  in 
all  the  imperfection  of  actuality,  and  the  superhuman 
self-command  of  Quercia’s  personages  is  replaced  in  those 
of  Donatello  by  all  the  explosive  vivacity  of  common  life. 
Nor  did  Quercia  here  or  elsewhere  avail  himself  of  the 
old  image-maker’s  license  to  represent  a figure  twice  in 
the  same  scene,  as  Donatello  does  in  the  interest  of  dra- 
matic definiteness,  with  the  servant  bringing  the  head  of 
the  Baptist. 

According  to  the  story  in  the  Gospels,  Herodias,  the 
sister-in-law  and  wife  of  King  Herod,  exasperated  at  the 
Baptist’s  condemnation  of  Herod  for  marrying  her,  in- 
cited her  daughter  Salome  to  demand  of  the  king,  who 
had  been  captivated  by  the  girl’s  dancing,  and  had  sworn 
to  give  her  whatever  she  asked,  the  head  of  John  on  a 


DON  A TELLO 


59 


charger.  Although  Herod  revered  John,  nevertheless, 
on  account  of  the  oath,  he  sent  forthwith  and  commanded 
his  head  to  be  brought. 

The  scene  is  a palace  interior  of  Roman  architecture. 
In  the  background  three  women  (Herodias  and  Salome?) 
bold-faced  and  bedizened,  meet  the  servant  returning 
with  the  Baptist’s  head.  In  the  middle  distance  two  fig- 
ures resembling  Roman  soldiers,  and  a player  on  the 
viol,  intent  on  his  music.  In  the  foreground  the  sudden 
entry  of  the  executioner  has  surprised  Salome  midway 
in  her  dance,  with  arms  stretched  sidewise  as  if  for  the 
start  of  a pirouette.  Herod  recoils  in  horror  from  the 
ghastly  object  thrust  at  him  by  his  subordinate,  and  at 
his  side  two  children  make  haste  to  escape.  Behind  the 
table  a councillor  recalls  to  the  unnerved  king  his  late 
command,  and  another  shrinks  far  away,  covering  his 
eyes.  A group  of  onlookers  stand  by  Salome.  The  table 
service,  a fowl,  a slice  of  broiled  food,  and  a hastily 
thrown  napkin,  attest  Donatello’s  minute  interest  in 
things  as  they  really  look. 

131.  Relief  of  Dancing  Cherubs ; from  the  external  pulpit 
of  the  cathedral  at  Prato. 

Of  marble  ; ordered  in  1428,  begun  in  1433,  and  finished 
in  1438. 

The  external  pulpit  of  the  cathedral  at  Prato  (from 
which  the  girdle  of  the  Virgin  is  periodically  shown  the 
people)  consists  of  a small  circular  gallery,  under  a mush- 
room-like roof  or  sounding-board  of  wood,  carried,  at 


6o 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


some  distance  from  the  ground,  about  the  right-hand 
corner  of  the  front  of  the  church,  which  is  here  rounded 
out  in  the  form  of  a heavy  column.  It  is  supported  on  a 
circle  of  consoles  springing  from  a moulded  base  which 
originally  rested  on  two  bronze  capitals,  one  having  dis- 
appeared. The  outer  surface  of  the  parapet  forming  the 
pulpit  proper  is  adorned  by  a series  of  seven  reliefs  of 
dancing  cherubs,  the  panels  being  separated  by  pairs  of 
fluted  columns.  The  background  of  the  reliefs  is  mosaic 
work  gilded. 

The  commission  for  the  pulpit  was  given  to  Donatello 
and  Michelozzo  jointly,  the  latter  having,  it  is  thought, 
contributed  the  architectural  part  of  the  work  at  least. 
The  motive  selected  by  or  prescribed  to  Donatello  for 
the  reliefs  was  a succession  of  baby  figures  dancing, 
playing,  and  singing  in  honor  of  the  Virgin,  to  whom 
the  pulpit  was  dedicated.  Perhaps  the  designer  found 
childish  figures  best  fitted  to  low  parapet  reliefs  ; or,  it 
may  be,  chose  to  give  to  children  the  praise  of  mother- 
hood. Some  of  the  figures  exhibit  a maturer  grace,  but 
in  most  the  stiff -legged  capering  of  infants  is  suggested 
to  the  life.  Regarded  closely,  the  faces  show  either  con- 
temporary Italian  childhood,  or  the  carver’s  skill,  in  no 
very  favorable  light  ; but  together  and  at  their  distance 
the  reliefs  are  gay  with  intricate  movement.  In  that, 
from  which  the  cast  was  taken,  the  third  counting  from 
the  front  of  the  church,  the  cherub  on  the  left  strides 
forward  beating  cymbals,  to  the  music  of  which  the 
others  dance  with  locked  hands  in  a whirling  circle. 


DONA  TELLO 


6l 


Mr.  Perkins  remarks  upon  the  “ deep  and  angular  edge- 
cuttings”  of  the  figures  in  the  foreground,  “which  mark 
clear  shadows  upon  the  flatter  relief  of  the  figures  be- 
hind them,  and  render  their  outlines  distinct  even  at  a 
considerable  distance.” 

460.  Statue  of  David  with  the  head  of  Goliath  ; in  the 
Museo  Nazionale  at  Florence. 

Of  bronze;  executed  for  Cosimo  de’  Medici,  perhaps 

about  1430. 

David  is  represented  as  a boy  of  fifteen  or  sixteen,  with 
slender  limbs,  smooth  face,  and  long  waving  hair  fall- 
ing over  his  shoulders.  He  is  naked  but  for  his  wide- 
brimmed  rustic  hat  with  its  wreath  of  leafage  secured 
by  ribbons,  and  his  singular  high  boots  open  at  the  toes 
like  sandals.  While  the  form  of  these  may  in  the  main 
be  Donatello’s  invention,  yet  they  recall  the  footwear  of 
Diana  in  many  antique  representations  of  the  goddess, 
and  like  the  wreathed  hat  (petasus,  the  cap  of  Mer- 
cury ?)  may  convey  an  allusion  to  David’s  life  as  hunter 
and  shepherd.  The  giant’s  head  under  his  conqueror’s 
feet  is  incased  in  a helmet  adorned  with  two  large  wings, 
on  one  of  which  David  has  planted  his  right  foot,  the 
left  resting  on  Goliath’s  neck.  The  uplifted  visor  of  the 
helmet  displays  an  elaborate  relief  of  winged  genii  draw- 
ing a chariot ; a decoration  of  pagan  flavor,  marking  Goli- 
ath as  the  follower  of  false  gods.  The  motive  is  based 
upon  that  of  an  antique  cameo  now  in  Naples,  showing 
Bacchus  drawn  in  a chariot  by  Cupids.  The  gem  for- 


62 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


merly  belonged  to  the  Medici,  and  was  copied  by  Dona- 
tello in  a medallion  for  their  palace  in  Florence.  The 
two  great  wings  were  unknown  in  Greek  or  Roman  ar- 
mor, and  unexpectedly  suggest  another  heathenism  than 
the  classic,  that  of  the  heroes  of  Teutonic  tradition.  But 
the  main  conception  of  the  David  as  a figure  nearly 
naked  is  doubtless  due  to  the  influence  of  antiquity.  It 
is  the  first  nude  statue  of  modern  times,  and  its  execu- 
tion before  Donatello’s  authenticated  journey  to  Rome 
in  1433  would  tend  to  confirm  the  legend  of  an  earlier 
visit  in  1403. 

The  boy’s  right  hand  grasps  the  giant’s  sword ; and 
his  left,  akimbo  on  his  hip,  holds  a stone.  He  looks 
downward,  as  if  at  the  great  body  before  him.  A heavy 
garland  closely  encircles  the  base  of  the  statue. 

44.  Twelve  Reliefs  of  Singing  and  Playing  Cherubs ; 
from  the  high  altar  of  the  church  of  San  Antonio  (II 
Santo)  at  Padua. 

Of  bronze.  The  altar  of  which  these  reliefs  originally 
formed  a part  was  ordered  in  1446  and  consecrated  in 
1450.  In  the  seventeenth  century  it  was  taken  down  and 
the  parts  distributed  about  the  church ; but  within  the 
past  few  years  they  have  been  restored  to  their  original 
place. 

In  1443  Donatello,  then  nearly  sixty  years  old  and 
widely  known  in  Italy,  was  invited  to  Padua  to  take  part 
in  the  work  of  adorning  the  church  of  San  Antonio,  or 
“ II  Santo,”  as  the  great  Paduan  saint  was  himself  called 
in  his  lifetime.  The  high  altar  of  bronze  with  its  rich 


DONATELLO 


63 


sculptured  ornament  was  the  principal  result  of  this 
commission,  although  while  in  Padua  Donatello  com- 
pleted also  the  still  more  famous  equestrian  statue  of 
Gattamelata  for  the  square  before  the  church.  The  ar- 
chives of  II  Santo  record  the  names  of  many  assistants 
in  the  work,  casters,  sculptors,  gilders,  and  painters,  and 
it  is  now  surmised  that  hardly  more  than  the  sketches 
for  the  altar  sculptures  may  have  been  furnished  by 
Donatello  himself.  In  the  twelve  reliefs  of  singing  and 
playing  cherubs,  from  which  the  present  casts  were 
taken,  the  motives  of  the  master  appear  to  have  been 
interpreted  by  scholars  of  very  different  degrees  of  skill. 
The  cherub  blowing  the  flute  is  at  once  conspicuous 
through  its  rude  workmanship,  while  there  is  much  re- 
finement of  execution  in  some  of  the  other  figures.  For 
the  most  part  they  stand  at  rest  while  they  sing  or  play, 
but  one  rises  on  tiptoe  as  he  blows  the  double  flute,  and 
another,  perhaps  the  most  striking  in  conception,  dances 
and  shouts  as  he  shakes  his  tambourine. 

57.  Relief  of  Christ  mourned  by  Cherubs;  in  the  Vic- 
toria and  Albert  Museum,  South  Kensington.  Its  ori- 
ginal location  is  not  known,  but  it  was  evidently  designed 
for  an  altar  front. 

Of  marble;  perhaps  executed  about  1450.  J.  C.  Robin- 
son, “ Catalogue  of  Italian  Sculptures  in  the  South  Ken- 
sington Museum,”  London,  1862. 

The  body  of  Christ  is  supported  in  a sitting  posture 
by  two  cherubs,  the  left  arm  over  the  shoulder  of  one, 


64 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


and  the  drooping  head  supported  by  the  hand  of  the 
other.  The  lips  of  the  former  are  parted  as  if  for  a cry, 
while  the  latter  returns  his  glance  with  a face  half  con- 
cealed by  his  hand.  Behind,  two  cherubs  with  their 
hands  at  their  temples,  and  a third  turned  away  and 
shouting  as  if  to  spread  the  news.  The  features  of 
Christ  are  at  rest  but  for  a painful  contraction  of  the 
brows,  and  with  the  body  are  of  the  type  of  a man  of 
the  common  people.  Beside  the  main  bending  lines  re- 
sulting from  the  disposition  of  the  bodies  and  members 
of  the  group,  the  relief  is  full  of  fine  curves  formed  by 
hair,  wings,  and  irregularly  flowing  drapery,  exemplifying 
the  very  delicate  low  relief  called  “ stiacciato  ” (crushed 
flat),  a form  ascribed  to  Donatello,  but  in  which  he  had 
many  successors. 

139.  Bust  in  Relief  of  St.  John  the  Baptist  as  a Boy ; 

in  the  Museo  Nazionale  at  Florence. 

Of  the  gray  sandstone  called  pietra  serena. 

The  Baptist  is  represented  as  a boy  of  ten  or  twelve, 
seen  in  profile,  with  his  shirt  of  camel’s  hair  upon  his 
bosom  and  light  drapery  over  his  shoulders.  About  his 
head,  with  its  flying  wavy  locks,  is  the  nimbus  symbolic 
of  sainthood,  and  upon  his  shoulder  the  reed  cross  spe- 
cially attributed  to  the  Baptist.  (“  A reed  shaken  by  the 
wind.”)  Though  no  characterization  of  the  youthful 
prophet  may  have  been  attempted  in  the  work,  it  is 
achievement  enough  to  have  given  in  this  unassuming 
face,  with  its  lip  drawn  upward  by  the  ambitious  little 


DONATELLO 


65 


nose,  the  image  of  a real  boy,  more  serious  and  gentle 
than  most,  but  as  naively  unconscious  as  any. 

Attributed  to  Donatello. 

56.  Bust  in  Relief  called  St,  Cecilia;  in  the  possession 
of  Lord  Wemyss. 

Of  stone. 

The  relief  represents  a beautiful  young  woman,  with 
bent  head  and  downcast  glance,  and  wearing  a low-necked 
tunic  without  ornament  and  a cap  with  wide  upturned 
edge.  Over  her  head  is  the  suggestion  of  a nimbus. 
Her  hair  is  bound  over  her  forehead  and  into  a knot  be- 
hind by  a narrow  ribbon  with  long  gracefully  curving 
ends.  The  work  is  executed  in  very  low  relief,  and  its 
sketchy,  soft  modelling,  with  the  gentle  idealism  of  the 
face,  has  led  later  critics  to  question  whether  Desiderio 
da  Settignano  (1428-1464)  or  perhaps  some  other  sculp- 
tor a whole  century  later,  may  not  have  been  its  author 
rather  than  Donatello. 

162.  Relief  of  a Lion’s  Head;  in  the  sacristy  of  San  Lo- 
renzo, Florence. 

Of  marble. 

Only  the  lion’s  face  appears,  with  his  long  mane  flow- 
ing to  a point  under  his  chin.  It  is  of  much  less  conven- 
tional type  than  that  of  Donatello’s  “ Marzocco,”  the 
heraldic  lion  of  Florence,  formerly  in  the  Palazzo  Vec- 
chio,  and  now  preserved  in  the  Bargello. 


66 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


Luca  della  Robbia:  born  in  Florence  in  1400.  Very- 
little  is  known  of  his  personal  history.  He  appears  to  have 
learned  the  trade  of  a goldsmith,  and  to  have  led  a quiet 
and  frugal  life,  absorbed  in  artistic  labor  with  his  nephews, 
Andrea  and  Simone.  He  never  married.  In  1471  he  was 
elected  president  of  the  guild  of  artists  in  Florence,  but  was 
obliged  to  decline  on  account  of  ill  health.  In  the  same  year 
he  made  his  will,  by  which  he  constituted  his  nephew  Simone 
heir  to  all  his  property ; for,  as  he  wrote,  the  whole  of  it  was 
not  the  equivalent  of  the  art  which  he  had  taught  his  nephew 
Andrea,  and  by  which  the  latter  had  proved  well  able  to  sup- 
port his  family.  He  died  eleven  years  later,  on  the  20th  of 
February,  1482. 

The  work  of  Luca  della  Robbia  alone  among  Italian  sculp- 
tors of  the  fifteenth  century  can  be  compared  with  that  of 
Ghiberti  or  Donatello  in  quality  and  influence.  While  inspired 
by  a genius  widely  different,  it  not  only  reached  an  equal 
artistic  level,  but  was  the  origin  of  a special  style  continued 
by  others  of  his  name  throughout  the  succeeding  century. 
This  style  was  that  of  reliefs  in  colored  and  glazed  terra-cotta. 
There  exist  in  Florence  and  elsewhere  many  examples  of 
reliefs  in  painted  terra-cotta,  dating  from  before  Luca’s  time, 
but  the  invention  of  a preservative  glaze  is  apparently  due  to 
him.  He  seems  to  have  reached  middle  life  before  beginning 
to  work  in  clay,  thenceforth  devoting  himself  almost  exclusively 
to  this  material,  doubtless  on  account  of  its  cheapness  and  the 
durability  the  process  of  glazing  had  proved  to  give  it.  His 
earliest  known  sculptures,  the  marble  reliefs  for  one  of  the 
organ  lofts  in  the  cathedral  at  Florence  (1431-1437),  are  at 
the  same  time  the  most  celebrated  from  his  hand.  Whether 
or  no  there  is  truth  in  Vasari’s  report  that  his  previous  years 


LUCA  DELLA  ROBBIA 


67 


as  a sculptor  were  spent  at  Rimini  in  the  service  of  the  Mala- 
testa,  it  is  certain  that  other  work  of  importance  must  have 
preceded  productions  of  perfect  maturity  like  these.  From 
the  same  decade  date  five  small  marble  reliefs  of  the  Arts  and 
Sciences  on  the  Campanile  (1437),  and  tw0  reliefs  of  events 
in  the  life  of  St.  Peter  (1438)  preserved,  still  unfinished,  in  the 
Bargello.  Later  he  executed  the  marble  and  terra-cotta  taber- 
nacle now  in  the  church  of  S.  Maria  at  Peretola,  near  Flor- 
ence (1442),  the  marble  tomb  of  Bishop  Federighi,  now  in 
S.  Trinitk  (1457),  and  the  bronze  doors  of  the  new  sacristy  in 
the  cathedral  beneath  his  organ  loft  (ordered  1446,  completed 
1467).  In  terra-cotta  his  earliest  complete  work  is  the  relief 
of  the  Resurrection  in  the  arch  over  the  same  sacristy  door 
(1443).  Other  sculptures  in  this  material,  of  which  contem- 
porary documents  prove  him  the  author,  are  the  relief  of  the 
Ascension  over  the  old  sacristy  door  opposite  (1446),  the 
lunette  of  the  Madonna  and  saints  over  the  portal  of  S.  Do- 
menico in  Urbino  (1449),  and  the  two  kneeling  angels  in  the 
old  sacristy  of  the  cathedral,  his  only  statues.  Vasari  ascribes 
to  him  also  a lunette  of  the  Madonna  with  saints  over  a door 
in  the  Via  dell’  Agnolo  in  Florence,  a like  lunette  now  in  the 
Bargello,  several  of  the  armorial  bearings  of  the  Guilds  of 
Florence  over  niches  on  the  fa$ade  of  Or  San  Michele,  and  the 
decorated  ceilings  of  two  chapels  in  San  Miniato,  of  the  Pazzi 
chapel  in  Santa  Croce,  and  of  S.  Giobbe  at  Venice.  While  the 
attribution  of  these  last  two  works  to  Luca  della  Robbia  has 
been  contested,  three  reliefs  not  mentioned  by  Vasari,  upon 
three  altars  in  the  church  at  Impruneta,  a few  miles  south  of 
Florence,  are  now  generally  recognized  as  his.  Another  im- 
portant work,  the  terra-cotta  group  of  the  Visitation  in  the 
church  of  S.  Giovanni  fuor  Civitas  in  Pistoia,  formerly  attrib- 


68 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


uted  to  Fra  Paolino  (1490-1547)  and  by  some  to  Andrea  della 
Robbia,  has  of  late  been  referred  to  Luca  himself.  A number 
of  smaller  works,  mostly  reliefs  of  the  Madonna  and  Child, 
both  in  and  out  of  Italy,  are  now  by  common  consent  ascribed 
to  Luca,  although  upon  internal  evidence  only. 

There  is  in  the  sculptures  of  Luca  della  Robbia  a trait  of 
calm  nobility,  both  in  composition  and  expression,  which 
recalls  the  spirit  of  antique  art,  although  evidently  inspired 
from  within  and  not  derived  from  without.  Like  those  of 
antiquity  again,  the  expressive  interest  of  his  creations  is  that 
of  character  rather  than  event,  poetry  rather  than  drama. 
The  individuality  and  truth  of  his  figures  is  such  as  to  suggest 
portraiture ; yet  the  living  model  has  in  each  case  given  but 
the  hint  for  an  ideal  creation,  often  of  the  highest  beauty. 
Not  the  least  striking  sign  of  the  vigor  of  his  artistic  imagina- 
tion is  the  inexhaustible  variety  of  the  plastic  motives  he  was 
able  to  invent  within  the  narrow  limits  of  a few  subjects.  The 
same  fecundity  of  fancy,  together  with  an  exquisite  sense  of 
beauty  in  form  and  color,  is  exhibited  in  his  decorative  designs 
of  flowers  and  fruit,  in  which,  in  the  humbler  material,  he  was 
the  worthy  successor  of  Ghiberti. 

468.  Ten  Reliefs  of  Singing,  Playing,  and  Dancing 
Youths  and  Children;  from  the  organ  loft  of  the 
cathedral  of  Florence,  now  preserved  in  the  Cathedral 
Museum. 

Of  marble  ; executed  between  1431  and  1437.  B.  Marrai, 
“ Le  Ricomposizioni  della  Cantoria  di  Luca  della  Robbia,” 
Arte  Italiana,  IX,  1900,  p.  82. 

In  1431  the  authorities  of  the  cathedral  of  Florence 
intrusted  Luca  della  Robbia  with  the  task  of  erecting  an 


LUCA  DELLA  ROBBIA 


69 


elaborate  marble  gallery  over  the  door  from  the  dome 
into  the  new  sacristy  on  the  north,  to  inclose  a large 
organ  which  was  to  be  installed  in  this  position.  Two 
years  later,  in  1433,  the  commission  for  a similar  though 
smaller  gallery  to  be  built  over  a door  opposite,  leading 
from  the  dome  on  the  south  into  the  old  sacristy,  was 
given  to  Donatello.  The  two  galleries  were  each  finished 
in  about  six  years.  Both  were  ornamented  with  reliefs, 
those  of  Luca  forming  ten  separate  panels  representing 
groups  of  singing,  playing,  and  dancing  children  and 
youths,  while  those  of  Donatello  were  united  into  a con- 
tinuous frieze,  representing  frolicking  genii.  Vasari, 
writing  a century  later,  tells  us  the  galleries  were  thirty 
feet  from  the  floor  of  the  church  ; and  while  he  admits 
that  in  Luca’s  sculptures  “ the  throats  of  the  singers  can 
be  seen  swelling,  and  the  hands  of  those  resting  their 
music  on  the  shoulders  of  the  smaller  can  be  seen  beating 
time,”  he  criticises  the  artist  for  giving  them  a fineness 
of  finish  invisible  at  that  distance.  Donatello’s  figures, 
he  says,  were  simply  sketched,  and  yet  to  look  at  them 
one  would  think  them  alive  and  in  motion. 

In  1688,  on  the  occasion  of  the  marriage  of  Prince  Fer- 
dinand, both  parapets  with  the  panels  were  taken  down, 
and  large  galleries  of  carved  wood  substituted  for  them. 
They  remained  in  storerooms  more  than  a century,  in 
1822  being  removed  to  the  Uffizzi  Gallery.  In  1845  the 
lower  portions  also  were  taken  down  with  the  woodwork 
of  1688  and  replaced  by  the  present  stone  galleries,  the 
work  of  the  architect  Baccani.  Neglected  and  forgotten 


70 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


in  the  cathedral  storerooms  for  twenty  years,  in  1867  they 
were  discovered  and  placed,  without  arrangement,  in  the 
courtyard  of  the  National  Museum,  whither  the  parapets 
had  also  been  brought.  In  1883  the  Cathedral  Board  of 
Works  proposed  to  restore  both  old  galleries  to  their 
original  position,  but  the  National  Art  Commission  fa- 
vored their  erection  in  the  large  hall  of  the  Museo  Na- 
zionale,  and  as  a compromise  it  was  decided  to  establish 
the  present  Cathedral  Museum,  where  they  were  finally 
set  up  under  the  supervision  of  the  architect,  Professor 
Dal  Moro,  and  where  they  have  since  remained.  The 
gallery  of  Donatello  was  almost  intact,  but  the  crowning 
cornice  and  the  pilasters  separating  the  reliefs  in  Luca’s 
work  had  been  lost,  and  these  portions  were  renewed. 

The  organ  loft  of  Luca  consists  of  a narrow  balcony 
resting  on  five  consoles  springing  from  a marble  back- 
ground containing  four  reliefs  in  the  four  spaces.  The 
parapet  of  the  balcony  is  divided  into  four  similar  spaces 
by  the  restored  pilasters  over  the  consoles,  and  within 
these,  and  on  each  end  of  the  gallery,  are  six  more  reliefs. 
The  rich  cornice,  newly  replaced,  crowns  the  work,  and 
below  the  consoles  runs  another. 

Upon  narrow  friezes  beneath  these  two  cornices,  and 
upon  a third  at  the  base  of  the  parapet,  are  incised  the 
words  of  the  150th  Psalm,  in  the  Vulgate.  The  first  two 
verses  of  the  psalm,  whose  burden  is  a general  exhorta- 
tion to  praise  the  Lord,  are  written,  with  many  abbrevia- 
tions, across  the  uppermost  frieze ; and  the  remainder, 
which  consist  of  exhortations  to  praise  him  with  various 


LUCA  DELLA  ROBBIA 


7 1 


instruments,  in  the  dance  and  with  the  voice,  are  extended 
across  the  second  and  abbreviated  across  the  lowest,  this 
arrangement  bringing  the  successive  exhortations  approx- 
imately under  the  successive  reliefs,  to  which  they  prove 
to  give  the  key.  These  later  verses  are  as  follows  : — 

“ Praise  him  with  the  sound  of  the  trumpet  (the  first 
relief)  : praise  him  with  the  psaltery  (the  second)  and 
harp  (the  third).  Praise  him  with  the  timbrel  (the  fourth) 
and  dance  (the  fifth)  : praise  him  with  stringed  instru- 
ments and  organs  (the  sixth).  Praise  him  upon  the  loud 
(in  the  Vulgate  ‘ well-sounding ’)  cymbals  (the  seventh); 
praise  him  upon  the  high-sounding  (in  the  Vulgate  ‘jubi- 
lant ’)  cymbals  (the  eighth).  Let  everything  that  hath 
breath  praise  the  Lord  (the  ninth  and  the  tenth,  on  the 
narrow  ends  of  the  gallery).” 

In  the  first  relief  three  youths  on  the  left  blow  upon 
trumpets  supported  in  their  right  hands,  the  tubes  of 
two  being  long  and  straight,  and  that  of  the  third  bent 
round  upon  itself  like  a trombone.  In  the  background 
opposite  them  are  visible  the  heads  and  shoulders  of 
three  players  upon  flutes,  the  one  on  the  left  still  per- 
forming, while  the  other  two  have  taken  theirs  from  their 
mouths  to  glance  away. 

The  motive  of  the  foreground  group  of  this  relief  is 
particularly  worthy  of  an  attention  which  it  seems  thus 
far  to  have  escaped.  Four  little  girls,  with  locked  fore- 
fingers, are  carrying  out  the  evolution  familiar  still  to 
all  children,  by  which  a circle  facing  inward  and  joining 
hands  is  transformed,  by  passing  in  succession  under  the 


72 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


arch  made  by  the  lifted  arms  of  a pair  of  the  group,  into 
a circle  facing  outward.  The  two  on  the  left  have  al- 
ready run  under  and  are  facing  outward,  the  second  just 
managing  to  retain  her  balance  as  she  is  twisted  about 
by  a backward  pull  from  the  first  ; the  third,  with  flying 
hair  and  a smiling  face,  bends  under  the  arch  raised  over 
her  by  the  first  and  fourth,  while  the  latter  stands  poised 
upon  one  foot  for  the  final  whirl  which  is  to  bring  a new 
order  out  of  the  pretty  confusion.  The  choice  of  a mo- 
tive like  this,  which  joins  a far-away  past  with  the  imme- 
diate present,  offers  a bit  of  evidence  as  noteworthy  as 
it  is  charming  of  Luca’s  close  adherence  to  the  realities 
of  life  about  him. 

In  the  second  relief  three  young  women  stand  facing 
the  spectator,  each  holding  against  her  body  a triangular 
zither-like  instrument,  of  which  she  is  represented  as 
plucking  the  strings.  All  three  are  singing,  one  with 
bent  head  as  if  listening  to  the  instrument  on  her  bosom, 
one  with  head  thrown  back  and  upward  glance  as  if 
wholly  given  over  to  her  song.  At  their  feet  are  seated 
two  naked  boys,  also  playing  on  psalteries.  In  the  back- 
ground five  youths  stand  listening,  two  with  their  hands 
on  the  shoulders  of  two  of  the  singers,  and  one  with  lips 
parted  to  join  in  the  music. 

In  the  third  relief  two  young  women  play  upon  the 
lute,  one  of  them  singing  also;  and  in  the  background 
stand  four  others,  in  various  attitudes  of  attention.  Their 
costume,  the  long  clinging  tunic  and  the  full  mantle,  is 
mediaeval  in  type ; while  the  players  on  the  psaltery  in 


LUCA  DELLA  ROBBIA 


73 


the  preceding  relief  wear  over  a tight-sleeved  inner  gar- 
ment a robe  like  a classical  chiton,  fastened  in  knots  at 
the  shoulders,  and  gathered  into  a hanging  fold  about 
the  waist.  At  the  feet  of  the  lute-players  two  naked  boys 
are  seated,  looking  downward  and  pointing  upward,  to 
direct  the  spectators  below  to  the  singers  above.  The 
license  by  which  these  two  figures,  plastically  a unit  with 
the  relief,  are  given  a significance  linking  its  ideal  world 
with  the  real  situation  for  which  it  was  designed,  is  one 
which  Luca  did  not  elsewhere  permit  himself  in  these 
sculptures.  Although  in  strictness  an  artistic  solecism, 
so  delicate  a mingling  of  the  real  and  the  ideal  makes 
less  the  impression  of  disharmony  than  of  playfulness. 

In  the  fourth  relief  two  youths  are  carrying  small 
drums  in  the  left  hand,  while  beating  them  with  sticks 
held  in  the  right.  A third  wears  his  slung  about  his 
neck,  and  blows  on  a pipe  held  in  his  left  hand.  Two 
others  are  spectators  in  the  background.  In  front  of  the 
drummers  two  nearly  naked  boys  face  each  other  in  a 
lively  dance,  one  showing  in  his  left  palm  a twig,  this 
emblem  perhaps  identifying  their  play,  to  the  public  of 
Luca’s  time,  with  some  childish  game.  The  two  smaller 
boys,  peeping  out  on  the  extreme  right  and  left,  intensify 
the  action  of  the  relief  by  showing  its  effects  ; one  forced 
to  hold  his  hands  over  his  ears  while  still  laughing  at  the 
hubbub,  the  other  thoroughly  dismayed  thereby  and 
clinging  to  the  skirt  of  the  figure  before  him. 

In  the  fifth  relief  seven  little  girls  with  flying  drapery 
and  hair,  and  wearing  heavy  wreaths  of  leaves  and  flowers, 


74 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


dance  in  a circle,  each  holding  her  right-hand  neighbor 
by  the  forefinger.  Their  representation  in  a ring  shows 
them  in  every  variety  of  aspect,  both  back  and  side  and 
front,  and  in  every  grade  of  relief  from  flat  to  round.  All 
are  singing  and  one  or  two  shouting  at  the  very  tops  of 
their  voices. 

In  the  sixth  relief  a group  of  eight  children  stand 
about  a ninth,  who  is  seated  and  holds  on  his  knee  a 
small  organ  of  which  he  touches  the  keys  with  his  right 
hand  while  moving  the  bellows  with  the  left.  On  the 
right  two  of  his  companions  are  playing,  one  a harp,  the 
other  a lute.  All  the  figures  are  clothed  in  light  drapery, 
the  players  on  the  organ  and  lute  in  a short  cloak  fastened 
by  a clasp  on  the  right  shoulder,  like  the  Greek  chlamys. 
All  have  an  air  of  pensive  quiet,  markedly  in  contrast 
with  the  tumult  of  the  preceding  scenes,  and  for  which 
the  motive  is  doubtless  to  be  sought  in  the  impressiveness 
of  organ  tones.  The  parted  lips  of  all  of  the  group  seem 
sometimes  to  represent  whispered  singing,  and  some- 
times only  absorbed  attention.  The  organ  is  the  portable 
instrument  commonly  used  in  the  fifteenth  and  earlier 
centuries,  from  which  the  imposing  mechanism  now 
known  by  that  name,  with  its  pedals  and  many  pipes, 
had  hardly  in  Luca’s  time  begun  to  develop. 

In  the  seventh  relief  the  “ well-sounding  cymbals  ” of 
the  Vulgate  are  interpreted  as  the  tambourine.  The  fig- 
ures are  seven  children,  six  arranged  in  symmetrical 
groups  of  three, on  either  side  a seventh  in  the  central 
foreground.  In  each  of  these  groups  the  figure  nearest 


LUCA  DELLA  ROBBIA 


75 


the  centre  of  the  relief  is  farthest  in  the  background, 
and  is  that  of  a listener,  with  uplifted  glance,  and  hands, 
in  the  one  case  folded  and  in  the  other  crossed.  The 
next  figure  occupies  in  each  group  the  middle  distance, 
and  is  that  of  a player  who  has  stopped  to  listen,  holding 
his  tambourine  before  him  in  both  hands.  The  outer- 
most figure  of  each  group  is  in  the  foreground,  and  re- 
presents a player  holding  his  tambourine  in  the  right 
hand  and  beating  it  with  the  left.  The  groups  are  coun- 
terparts also  in  their  drapery,  the  left-hand  player  being 
clothed  and  the  right-hand  one  nude,  while  the  left-hand 
intermediate  figure  is  nude  and  the  right-hand  one 
clothed,  both  listening  figures  being  clothed.  The  ideal 
character  given  the  relief  by  these  regular  arrangements 
is  still  further  emphasized  by  the  cherub’s  wings  repre- 
sented on  the  shoulders  of  the  outermost  figures.  The 
player  in  the  centre  is  not  beating  his  tambourine,  but 
running  the  tips  of  his  fingers  over  it  after  the  familiar 
habit  of  performers  on  that  instrument.  He  is  naked 
and  carries  about  his  neck  a heavy  garland  of  laurel 
leaves  and  berries,  a long  ribbon  flying  from  his  right 
arm.  The  end  of  another  garland  is  visible  on  the  right. 
The  representation  of  plant  forms,  of  which  these  gar- 
lands and  the  wreaths  already  mentioned  are  instances, 
was  to  become  in  later  years  an  important  branch  of 
Luca’s  art. 

In  the  eighth  relief  the  “cymbals  of  jubilation”  of 
the  Vulgate  are  cymbals  as  we  now  know  them.  Seven 
children,  not  far  out  of  babyhood,  move  in  procession 


76 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


from  right  to  left  of  the  relief  toward  the  centre  of  the 
gallery,  six  of  them  beating  their  cymbals  as  they  go, 
the  seventh  visible  only  as  a profile  in  the  background. 
The  three  foreground  figures  have  flying  drapery, 
twisted  or  fastened  by  clasps  on  shoulder  and  side.  The 
foremost  runs  on  tiptoe,  with  head  thrown  back  and  fly- 
ing locks ; the  second  at  the  top  of  his  speed  with  a 
long  low  stride.  This  active  movement  has  unfastened 
a clasp  of  the  boy’s  drapery,  and  it  flies  back  from  his 
bare  shoulder  as  he  runs.  The  figures  in  the  background 
are  clothed  and  move  more  sedately,  the  central  one 
not  shouting  with  the  others. 

Of  the  eight  reliefs  on  the  front  of  the  balcony,  the 
upper  four,  on  the  face  of  the  parapet,  are  principally 
composed  of  figures  of  youths.  The  four  occupying  the 
more  modest  position  between  the  consoles  below  con- 
tain figures  of  small  children  only.  It  is  noticeable,  fur- 
ther, that  while  the  order  of  the  eight  reliefs  is  given  by 
the  inscriptions  running  beneath  them,  the  artist  has 
chosen  so  to  interpret  his  motives  as  to  make  the  four 
central  reliefs  scenes  of  quiet  and  the  four  outer  reliefs 
on  the  right  and  left  scenes  of  movement.  It  is  as  if  we 
were  present  at  a solemn  festival  where  the  mood  of  the 
participants  lightened  from  one  of  gravity  at  the  heart 
of  the  throng  to  one  of  gayety  on  the  outskirts. 

The  ninth  and  tenth  reliefs  we  may  believe  to  have 
been  transcriptions  from  the  life  of  which  the  balcony 
they  adorn  was  thereafter  to  be  the  scene.  In  the  ninth 
two  youths,  dressed  in  close-fitting  inner  garments,  and 


LUCA  DELLA  ROBBIA 


77 


with  long  mantles  wrapped  round  the  waist  and  thrown 
over  the  arm,  face  the  spectator,  with  arms  upon  each 
other’s  shoulders,  and  hold  between  them  a long  scroll 
which  they  read  attentively  while  they  sing.  The  fore- 
head of  one  contracts  with  his  effort,  and  on  his  right 
shoulder  the  long  forefinger  of  the  other  stretches  out 
to  beat  time  to  the  music.  On  his  left  shoulder  rests 
the  hand  of  a third  singer  standing  between  them, 
equally  intent  on  the  music  and  grasping  his  cloak  with 
his  other  hand.  In  the  background  appear  two  other 
figures,  both  listening  in  rapt  attention,  one  turning 
aside  and  gazing  up  with  his  cheek  on  his  hand. 

In  the  tenth  relief  a group  of  five  choristers,  three 
youths  behind  and  two  boys  in  front,  are  crowded  to- 
gether singing  from  the  same  book,  a heavy  volume 
which  the  boys  hold  between  them.  The  youth  on  the 
right  helps  hold  down  the  page  with  one  hand,  while  his 
companion  allows  his  fingers  to  stray  among  the  curly 
locks  of  the  boy  before  him,  both  singing  earnestly 
meanwhile  with  tense  lips  and  knitted  brows.  The  third, 
who  is  younger,  follows  rather  than  leads  in  the  music, 
his  retiring  position  and  relaxed  attitude  indicating  much 
less  assurance  in  its  delivery.  One  of  the  boys  throws 
his  head  to  one  side  and  beats  time  with  his  foot  in  the 
fervor  of  his  song.  The  other,  a striking  image  of  boyish 
grace  and  vigor,  sings  carefully,  but  with  a certain  sto- 
lidity. The  two  background  figures  are  listeners,  one 
raising  his  hand  as  if  in  admiration. 


78 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


129.  Relief  of  St.  Augustine,  reading,  attended  by  Two 
Angels ; one  of  ten  panels  in  the  doors  of  the  new 
(north)  sacristy  in  the  cathedral  at  Florence. 

Of  bronze;  ordered  1446,  completed  1467. 

In  1437,  just  before  the  completion  by  Luca  della  Rob- 
bia and  by  Donatello  of  the  two  choir  galleries  of  the 
cathedral  at  Florence,  the  latter  was  commissioned  to 
furnish  two  doors  of  bronze  for  the  portal  under  Luca’s 
gallery.  When  nine  years  later  Donatello  was  called  to 
Padua,  without,  as  we  are  told,  having  even  begun  them, 
the  commission  was  intrusted  to  three  younger  artists, 
Luca,  Michelozzo,  and  Maso  di  Bartolommeo.  The  work 
which  was  the  result  of  their  collaboration,  and  which, 
although  completed  in  the  rough  within  two  years,  re- 
mained unfinished  for  nineteen  years  longer,  is  attributed 
in  greater  part  to  Luca,  and  is  counted  among  his  prin- 
cipal achievements.  It  consists  of  ten  reliefs  framed  in 
heavy  and  simple  mouldings,  with  quatrefoils  reduced  to 
trefoils  at  all  the  corners,  these  containing  heads,  per- 
haps portraits,  sculptured  in  the  round.  This  ornamenta- 
tion was  doubtless  suggested  by  that  of  Ghiberti’s  earlier 
and  simpler  doors  for  the  Baptistery ; but  only  in  a sin- 
gle detail,  the  angel  of  St.  Matthew,  does  Luca’s  work 
remind  one  of  the  later  and  more  elaborate  fruit  of  Ghi- 
berti’s half  century  of  labor  on  the  Baptistery  portals, 
then  well  toward  its  close.  The  five  panels  of  each  door 
are  together  inclosed  in  a plain  double  moulding,  and  the 
stone  portal  in  which  the  whole  is  set  is  almost  wholly 
devoid  of  ornament.  The  simplicity  and  even  bareness 


LUCA  DELLA  ROBBIA 


79 


of  the  work  as  a whole  is  in  part  attributable  to  the  same- 
ness of  the  subjects  prescribed  by  the  cathedral  admin- 
istration for  the  reliefs  — in  each  case  a seated  figure 
attended  on  either  hand  by  an  angel.  But  to  no  sculptor 
could  such  a commission  have  been  given  with  greater 
hope  of  a successful  artistic  outcome  than  to  the  origi- 
nator of  the  endless  variations  upon  the  single  theme  of 
Madonna  and  Child  which  afterward  issued  from  the 
studio  of  the  Robbia ; and  within  the  strait  limits 
assigned  him  Luca  produced  a work  of  which  detailed 
study  wholly  removes  any  impression  of  monotony  given 
by  a first  glance.  In  order  from  left  to  right  and  from 
top  to  bottom,  the  panels  contain  representations  of  the 
Virgin  and  Child,  St.  John  the  Baptist,  the  four  Evangel- 
ists, St.  John,  St.  Matthew,  St.  Luke,  and  St.  Mark, 
with  their  symbols  ; and  the  four  fathers  of  the  church, 
St.  Augustine,  St.  Jerome,  St.  Gregory,  and  St.  Ambrose. 
Of  all  the  twenty  angel  figures  there  is  not  one  in  which 
the  discovery  of  some  special  interest,  whether  in  the 
pose,  the  action,  or  the  flow  of  the  drapery,  does  not 
reward  the  attentive  spectator.  There  is  dignity  and 
sweetness  in  the  Madonna,  simplicity  and  character  in 
the  prophet  and  the  evangelists,  and  a suggestion  of 
ecclesiastical  pomp  in  the  fathers  of  the  church.  The 
present  cast  reproduces  the  relief  of  St.  Augustine,  who 
is  represented  in  his  episcopal  robes,  wearing  the  mitre, 
seated  between  two  youthful  angels  carrying  two  books, 
of  one  of  which  he  turns  the  leaves,  while  with  the  index 
finger  of  the  left  hand  he  keeps  his  place  in  the  other. 


8o 


ITALIAN  RENASSANCE  SCULPTURE 


In  this  double  occupation  there  is  a suggestion,  possibly 
intentional,  of  the  impetuous  temperament  of  the  Afri- 
can author  of  the  Confessions. 

Attributed  to  Luca  della  Robbia. 

413.1.  Group  of  the  Visitation;  in  the  church  of  San 
Giovanni  fuor  Civitas,  Pistoia. 

Of  white  enamelled  terra-cotta ; details  in  colors.  Date 
unknown.  A.  Marquand,  “ The  Madonnas  of  Luca  della 
Robbia,”  Am.  Journal  of  Archaeology,  IX,  1894,  p.  n. 

The  group  of  which  the  present  cast  is  a reproduction 
stands  in  a niche  in  the  nave  of  the  little  church  of  San 
Giovanni  fuor  Civitas  at  Pistoia.  In  regard  to  its  his- 
tory nothing  is  known.  It  was  formerly  thought  to  be 
the  work  of  Fra  Paolino  (1490-1547),  a painter  of 
Pistoia,  pupil  of  Fra  Bartolommeo.  Of  late  years  it  has 
been  attributed  on  internal  evidence  to  one  of  the  Rob- 
bia, being  assigned  at  first  to  Andrea,  and  later  to  Luca 
himself.  A work  hitherto  little  remarked,  it  is  now 
counted  among  the  masterpieces  of  Renaissance  sculp- 
ture ; the  change  not  only  witnessing  to  the  closer  study 
now  given  all  monuments  of  past  art,  but  significant 
also  of  the  growth  in  modern  esteem  of  the  qualities  of 
simple  verity  in  conception  and  execution  of  which  this 
group  is  so  conspicuous  an  example. 

The  theme  known  in  Christian  art  as  the  Visitation 
is  that  of  the  meeting  of  the  young  mother  of  Christ 
with  the  aged  mother  of  John  the  Baptist  before  the 
birth  of  their  children,  as  the  incident  is  related  in  the 


1 


LUCA  DELLA  ROBBIA 


8l 


Gospels.  “ And  Mary  arose  in  those  days  and  went 
into  the  hill  country  with  haste,  into  a city  of  Judah  ; 
and  entered  into  the  house  of  Zacharias  and  saluted 
Elizabeth.”  Unlike  many  of  the  representations  of  the 
Visitation,  where  both  figures  stand  erect,  and  in  closer 
accord  with  the  spirit  of  the  Bible  text,  this  group 
shows  Elizabeth  kneeling  in  an  attitude  of  noble  and 
devout  humility.  “ And  Elizabeth  spake  with  a loud 
voice  and  said,  . . . ‘ And  whence  is  this  to  me  that 
the  mother  of  my  Lord  should  come  to  me  ? ’ ” She 
has  fallen  to  her  knees  even  before  Mary  has  reached 
her,  and  as  the  Virgin  pauses,  abashed  by  this  mark  of 
reverence,  seeks  to  draw  her  gently  to  herself.  We  may 
thus,  perhaps,  without  doing  violence  to  the  sculptor’s 
intent,  interpret  the  distance  at  which  the  figures  are 
placed,  the  unstable  pose  of  Elizabeth,  as  if  moving  for- 
ward upon  her  knees,  the  mute  deprecation  of  Mary’s 
hands  upon  her  shoulders,  and  the  attitude  of  the  Vir- 
gin, as  if  midway  in  a reluctant  step.  The  ascription  of 
the  work  to  Fra  Paolino  was  possibly  inspired  by  local 
pride  ; for  it  is  in  the  style  as  well  as  the  material  of  the 
Robbia,  and  not  only  its  dignified  simplicity  and  the 
quality  of  its  workmanship,  but  the  delicacy  and  eleva- 
tion of  the  conception  and  the  refined  and  portrait-like 
verisimilitude  of  the  two  types,  warrant  the  attribution 
to  the  greatest  artist  of  that  name. 


82 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


Andrea  della  Robbia  : born  at  Florence  in  1435  (x437  0 j 
died  there  in  1525  (1528  ?).  The  heir  to  his  uncle’s  art,  as 
Luca  had  both  declared  and  provided  in  his  will,  Andrea  della 
Robbia  led,  like  him,  a long  and  uneventful  life  in  his  native 
city,  wholly  devoted  to  the  labors  of  the  studio.  He  had 
seven  sons,  of  whom  five  at  least  appear  to  have  been  aids 
in  his  work  ; two,  Giovanni  and  Girolamo,  eventually  attain- 
ing distinction  in  their  art,  the  former  as  the  sculptor  of  many 
well-known  works  in  various  parts  of  Tuscany,  including,  as 
some  have  thought,  the  reliefs  on  the  fagade  of  the  hospital 
of  the  Ceppo  at  Pistoia,  the  latter  as  the  decorator  of  the 
Chateau  of  Madrid,  built  by  Francis  the  First  of  France  in 
the  Bois  de  Boulogne  at  Paris.  Both  Andrea  and  his  sons 
devoted  themselves  almost  exclusively  to  sculpture  in  enam- 
elled terra-cotta,  in  which  material  the  workshop  of  the  Rob- 
bia became  in  the  second  and  third  generation  the  scene  of 
an  amazing  productivity,  more  abundant  by  far  than  in  Luca’s 
day.  It  is  remarkable  that  in  all  this  immense  mass  of  sculp- 
ture there  is  so  little  repetition,  and  that  so  few  examples 
fail  to  reach  an  artistic  level  at  least  respectable.  But  a small 
number  of  works  are  known  to  be  Andrea’s  on  the  evidence 
of  Vasari,  or  documentary  proof;  but  many  more  are  attrib- 
uted to  him  without  reserve  on  the  ground  of  their  identity 
in  style  with  these.  The  artistic  individuality  thus  revealed 
is  one  of  great  distinction  and  rare  charm,  if  of  less  fecundity 
and  elevation  than  Luca’s.  Andrea  grew  to  love  complexity 
in  his  draperies  and  attitudes,  and  rich  detail  in  the  accesso- 
ries of  his  compositions  ; his  works  are  more  decorative,  less 
works  of  independent  art,  than  those  of  Luca.  It  is  doubtless 
not  by  chance  that  the  sculptures  of  the  contemporary,  among 
the  Robbia,  of  the  great  preacher  Savonarola,  to  whom  art  ex- 


ANDREA  DELLA  ROBBIA 


83 


isted  as  a means  of  grace,  breathe  a more  markedly  religious 
spirit  than  is  found  either  among  the  simple  verities  of  Luca  or 
in  the  more  pronounced  naturalism  of  the  Ceppo  reliefs.  Yet 
Andrea’s  works  are  much  more  than  formal  decorations  ; the 
sweetest  and  most  peaceful  of  his  faces  are  never  masks,  nor 
have  the  most  conventional  of  his  figures  lost  the  spark  of 
life.  Andrea  seems  always  to  have  found  a special  inspira- 
tion in  the  representation  of  infancy.  His  only  work  in  mar- 
ble, the  altar  at  S.  Maria  delle  Grazie  near  Arezzo,  contains 
seventeen  heads  of  cherubs  and  five  complete  figures  of  in- 
fants ; and  the  best  known  of  all  his  sculptures  are  the  round 
reliefs  of  infants  in  swaddling  clothes  placed  between  the 
exterior  arches  of  the  Spedale  degli  Innocenti  in  Florence, 
each  one  a new  exponent  of  the  charm  of  babyhood.  Beside 
these  two  works,  Vasari  enumerates  the  following  as  from 
Andrea’s  hand  : two  reliefs  executed  for  citizens  of  Arezzo 
(one  has  since  been  lost)  ; a Madonna  in  S.  Maria  in  Grado 
in  Arezzo,  and  a Crucifixion  in  the  church  of  the  Brother- 
hood of  the  Trinity  in  the  same  city  (now  in  the  Lady  chapel 
of  the  cathedral)  ; several  reliefs  (an  Annunciation,  Adora- 
tion, Crucifixion,  Ascension,  and  Assumption,  among  his 
most  important  works)  at  the  convent  of  La  Verna  in  the 
mountains  north  of  Arezzo ; and  nine  medallions  with  a re- 
lief of  the  meeting  of  St.  Francis  and  St.  Dominic  in  the 
Loggia  di  S.  Paolo  at  Florence.  Among  the  other  sculptures 
to  which,  mainly  on  internal  evidence,  the  name  of  Andrea 
is  now  by  common  consent  attached,  the  following  may  be 
mentioned : a lunette  with  the  Madonna  and  saints  over  the 
main  portal  of  the  cathedral  at  Prato  (1489);  a frieze  with 
medallions  of  the  four  Evangelists  in  the  interior  of  the  dome 
of  Madonna  dei  Carceri  at  Prato ; a reredos  representing 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


the  Coronation  of  the  Virgin  at  the  convent  of  the  Osser- 
vanza  in  the  outskirts  of  Siena ; a lunette  of  the  Annuncia- 
tion over  the  doorway  of  the  church  of  S.  Maria  degli  Inno- 
centi  in  Florence  ; a Madonna  between  two  angels  over  a 
door  in  the  vestibule  of  the  Opera  del  Duomo  at  Florence ; 
a relief  of  the  Madonna  and  Child  with  the  insignia  of  the 
guild  of  architects  on  the  base,  now  in  the  Museo  Nazionale 
at  Florence  ; and  several  sculptures  attributed  to  his  declin- 
ing years ; a lunette  with  the  Madonna  and  saints  over  the 
main  doorway  of  the  cathedral  at  Pistoia  (1509),  and  three 
lunettes  of  the  Madonna,  St.  Peter,  and  St.  Thomas  Aquinas 
over  the  doorways  of  Madonna  della  Quercia  at  Viterbo. 
The  number  of  works  which,  while  not  universally  recognized 
as  Andrea’s,  are  attributed  to  him  by  one  or  another  author- 
ity, is  very  large,  including  many  Madonnas  and  a few  more 
important  compositions. 

413.  Four  Reliefs  of  Infants ; from  the  facade  of  the  Hos- 
pital of  the  Innocents  at  Florence. 

Of  enamelled  terra-cotta  ; the  drapery  partly  tinted  with 
brown,  the  background  blue.  Date  unknown,  but  probably 
an  early  work. 

The  reliefs  reproduced  in  the  present  casts  are  part 
of  a series  of  ten  adorning  the  spandrels  of  arches  on 
the  front  of  the  hospital  for  foundlings  at  Florence. 
Each  of  the  series  represents  a baby  boy  with  head  and 
arms  bare,  and  with  drapery  muffled  about  the  feet  and 
drawn  about  the  legs  and  flanks  with  narrow  bands  of 
like  material.  All  face  the  spectator,  as  they  might  lie 
in  the  beds  of  the  hospital  of  whose  purpose  they  are 


ANDREA  DELLA  ROBBIA 


85 


the  symbols.  No  one  of  the  figures  is  a replica  of  any 
other ; but  with  their  extended  arms  and  inclined  heads 
all  alike  seem  to  appeal  for  succor  to  the  passers-by 
below.  Most  of  them  submit  quietly  to  the  confinement 
of  their  swaddling  clothes,  and  the  ineffectual  disarray 
of  the  drapery  of  others,  revealing  the  frail  little  bodies 
within,  deepens  the  impression  of  their  helplessness. 
The  artist  has  availed  himself  of  a sculptor's  license  in 
making  both  faces  and  figures  more  mature  than  those 
of  babies  still  in  the  cradle ; but  in  the  verity  of  its 
types,  as  well  as  in  the  simplicity  and  naivete  of  their 
conception  arid  execution,  the  work  suggests  the  influ- 
ence of  Luca,  and  is  accordingly  assigned  to  the  earlier 
years  of  Andrea’s  career.  In  the  four  centuries  that 
have  elapsed  since  it  was  put  in  place,  the  hands  of  the 
figures  have  suffered  much  mutilation,  but  they  are 
otherwise  well  preserved. 

414.3.  Relief  of  the  Annunciation  ; over  the  door  of  the 
church  of  S.  Maria  in  the  court  of  the  Hospital  of  the 
Innocents  at  Florence. 

Of  enamelled  terra-cotta.  The  figures  white,  on  a blue 
ground.  Date  unknown,  but  probably  a work  of  Andrea’s 
middle  life. 

As  in  the  relief  of  the  same  subject  at  La  Verna,  there 
is  here  no  attempt  to  represent  the  scene  of  the  Annun- 
ciation as  it  might  have  occurred,  but  only  to  exhibit  the 
personages  concerned  therein,  with  certain  symbolic  ac- 
companiments. Floating  clouds  make  of  the  background 


86 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


an  image  of  heaven,  in  which,  at  the  centre,  God  the 
Father  in  the  likeness  of  a venerable  man  appears  sur- 
rounded by  a circle  of  cherubim.  Before  him,  on  its  mis- 
sion earthward,  flies  the  dove,  which  seems  just  to  have 
issued  from  his  outstretched  hands,  and  whose  halo  marks 
it  as  the  symbol  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  earth,  on  which 
the  angel  Gabriel  has  alighted,  and  where  Mary  kneels, 
is  represented  by  a course  of  masonry  like  the  coping  of 
a wall.  Directly  in  the  centre,  as  if  to  emphasize  by  a 
decorative  use  its  purely  ideal  significance,  stands  a jar 
of  the  lilies,  always  the  sign,  in  this  scene,  of  Mary’s  im- 
maculate nature.  In  his  left  hand  the  angel  carries 
others,  perhaps  the  image  of  the  unspotted  purity  still  to 
be  hers  in  the  motherhood  he  announces.  The  border  of 
the  relief  is  one  of  the  friezes  of  cherubs  so  favorite  with 
Andrea,  and  which  appear  to  perpetuate  the  faces  of  so 
many  beautiful  Florentine  children  of  his  day.  In  com- 
parison with  almost  any  of  the  works  ascribed  to  Luca, 
this  relief  is  of  much  greater  formality  of  design  and  con- 
ventionality in  detail  (excepting  the  cherubs’  heads).  The 
attitudes,  faces,  and  members  are  stiffened,  sharpened, 
and  refined  toward  ideals  not  natural  but  ecclesiastical ; 
the  draperies  have  become  much  involved,  less  apparently 
for  artistic  ends  than  for  the  sake  of  the  emotional  atmos- 
phere of  troubled  forms.  The  art  of  the  Robbia  is  in  a 
new  stage  ; but  if  less  an  art  than  before,  it  is  other  than 
art  by  an  impressiveness  both  noble  and  powerful. 


ANDREA  DELLA  ROBBIA 


87 


414.2.  Relief  of  the  Meeting  of  St.  Francis  and  St. 

Dominic ; from  the  Loggia  di  S.  Paolo  in  Florence. 

Of  terra-cotta  ; enamelled,  excepting  on  the  face  and 

hands.  The  loggia  completed  in  1495. 

The  Loggia  di  S.  Paolo  is  an  arcade  in  front  of  the 
former  convalescent  hospital  of  the  same  name  on  the 
Piazza  S.  Maria  Novella  in  Florence.  It  was  erected  be- 
tween 1490  and  1495  from  Brunelleschi’s  designs,  and 
decorated  in  terra-cotta,  as  Vasari  relates,  by  Andrea  della 
Robbia.  Beside  the  lunette  here  reproduced,  the  decora- 
tions comprise  eleven  medallions,  nine  of  circular  form, 
with  figures  of  saints  and  representations  of  Christ  heal-  • 
ing  the  sick,  and  two  semicircular  in  shape,  with  portraits, 
supposed  to  be  officials  of  the  hospital.  While  these 
smaller  reliefs  may  have  been  in  part  the  work  of  Andrea’s 
assistants,  the  principal  one  is  conceded  by  all  to  be  from 
the  hand  of  the  master.  The  lunette  represents  the  two 
great  leaders  of  thirteenth-century  Christendom,  the 
gentle  preacher  to  the  birds  and  the  zealous  pursuer  of 
heretics  meeting  in  an  affectionate  embrace.  No  his- 
torical event  appears  to  be  referred  to,  the  relief,  like 
other  portrayals  of  the  two  saints  in  company,  typifying 
either  a personal  regard  traditional  between  them,  or  the 
feelings  of  amity  binding  on  all  their  true  followers.  The 
dress  of  the  left-hand  figure  — the  gray  habit  and  the 
cord  — identifies  it  as  that  of  S.  Francis  ; while  the  white 
tunic  and  the  black  cloak  of  the  figure  on  the  right  is  the 
costume  of  the  Dominican  order.  It  is  not,  perhaps,  dis- 
cerning too  much  to  find  a designed  contrast  of  character 


88 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


between  the  two ; for  the  bending  form,  inclined  head, 
and  animated  face  of  the  figure  on  the  right  suggest  the 
suavity  and  force  of  the  man  of  affairs,  while  the  passive 
rigidity  of  the  recluse  and  the  mystic  seems  to  speak  in 
the  less  yielding  attitude  and  the  immobility  of  feature 
of  the  figure  on  the  left.  But  apart  from  any  expressive- 
ness of  its  subject,  and  considered  simply  as  a represen- 
tation of  two  aged  and  reverend  men  greeting  one  another 
with  the  kiss  of  peace,  the  relief  is  one  of  the  most 
notable  among  the  many  masterly  artistic  renderings  of 
the  daily  life  about  them  to  be  found  in  the  works  of  the 
Robbia. 

Attributed  to  Andrea  della  Robbia. 

414.4.  Relief  of  the  Madonna  and  Child;  under  the 
portico  of  the  Accademia  delle  Belle  Arti  at  Florence. 

Of  enamelled  terra-cotta;  white  figures  on  a blue  back- 
ground. Date  unknown. 

The  relief  from  which  the  present  cast  was  made  is 
one  of  many  representations  of  the  Madonna  and  Child, 
designed  as  the  reredos  of  small  altars  or  shrines,  as- 
cribed to  Andrea  or  to  those  under  his  direct  influence. 
According  to  the  illustration  of  the  similar  relief  also 
under  the  portico  of  the  Academy,  given  at  page  105  of 
Cavalucci  and  Molinier’s  work  on  the  Della  Robbia,  the 
panel  here  reproduced  is  in  the  original  surrounded  by 
a frame  representing  flowers  and  fruit  and  supported 
by  an  ornamental  bracket.  The  motive  seems  to  have 
been  a favorite  one  either  with  Andrea  or  his  patrons, 


ANDREA  DELLA  ROBBIA 


89 


for  several  other  reproductions  of  it  exist  elsewhere  in 
Florence. 


905.  Relief  of  the  Assumption  of  the  Virgin ; in  the 
Metropolitan  Museum,  New  York  city. 

Of  enamelled  terra-cotta ; white  figures  on  a background 
of  dark  blue,  with  traces  of  other  colors  in  many  details. 
The  head  and  hands  of  the  Virgin,  the  head  of  one  of  the 
cherubs,  and  those  of  the  three  saints  on  the  right,  together 
with  portions  of  feet,  are  modern  restorations.  Date  un- 
known. A.  Marquand,  “ Andrea  della  Robbia’s  Assump- 
tion of  the  Virgin  in  the.  Metropolitan  Museum,”  Am. 
Journal  of  Archaeology,  VII,  1891,  p.  422. 

This  work  consists  of  a large  central  panel  flanked  with 
ornamented  pilasters  bearing  an  entablature  surmounted 
by  a flat  arched  pediment.  The  motive  of  the  relief  in 
the  tympanum  of  the  pediment  — flying  angels  symmet- 
rically placed  — is  of  ancient  use  in  Christian  sculpture 
and  one  often  repeated  in  the  works  of  the  Robbia.  The 
entablature  contains  a frieze  of  infants’  heads,  carried  out 
with  the  variety  and  charm  that  is  characteristic  of  this 
special  form  of  ornamentation  in  the  works  of  Andrea 
della  Robbia.  The  decoration  of  the  pilasters  is  a florid 
design  of  scroll-work,  a want  of  entire  uniformity  which 
appears  between  the  two  in  the  original  (not  in  the  pre- 
sent cast),  being  perhaps  an  accident  of  the  studio. 
They  and  the  panel  between  them  doubtless  originally 
rested  upon  a predella,  or  row  of  smaller  panels,  the 
work  being  designed  as  the  reredos  of  an  altar.  In  spite 
of  the  grave  mutilation  it  has  suffered,  and  in  spite  of 


90 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


wholly  inadequate  attempts  at  *restoration,  the  work  still 
preserves  under  closer  scrutiny  what  may  well  be  the 
greater  part  of  its  original  effectiveness. 

The  event  known  in  ecclesiastical  tradition  as  the  As- 
sumption of  the  Virgin  is  her  bodily  resurrection  and 
translation  into  heaven  on  the  third  day  after  her  entomb- 
ment. According  to  the  legend,  the  twelve  apostles, 
gathered  together  miraculously  from  all  parts  of  the 
world,  were  witnesses  of  the  scene  and  found  the  open 
tomb  filled  with  flowers.  In  representations  of  the  As- 
sumption as  a mystery  of  religion,  of  which  the  present 
relief  follows  one  of  the  accepted  types,  the  place  of  the 
apostles  is  taken  by  a company  of  saints  of  the  church. 
The  saint  here  placed  on  the  left  of  the  centre  may  be 
identified  (by  the  stigmata  and  the  cross)  as  St.  Francis 
of  Assisi,  and  the  saint  on  the  right  (by  the  tablet)  as  S. 
Bernardino  of  Siena.  The  other  two  have  no  distinctive 
attributes,  but  the  figure  with  mitre  and  crozier  has  been 
recognized  as  S.  Donato,  Bishop  of  Arezzo.  The  effect 
of  all  these  figures  but  the  last  is  much  interfered  with 
by  the  poor  quality  of  the  modern  heads.  Between  the 
two  in  the  centre  appears  the  panelled  side  of  the  tomb 
with  its  springing  flowers,  of  which  still  others  show 
beyond  S.  Bernardino.  The  Virgin  is  represented  seated, 
holding  up  her  joined  hands,  and  closely  surrounded  by 
seven  winged  baby  heads.  The  oval  panel  with  pointed 
ends  within  which  she  sits,  and  to  which  the  heads  form 
a border,  is  the  mandorla  or  amande  mystique  of  church 
iconography,  the  symbol  of  the  Immaculate  Concep- 


ANTONIO  FEDERIGHI 


9* 


tion,  perhaps  in  allusion  to  the  rod  of  Aaron  (Numbers 
xvii,  8),  that  miraculously  budded  and  bore  almonds  in 
the  wilderness.  An  eighth  baby  head  with  wings  forms 
a pendant  to  the  oval.  Like  those  in  the  frieze,  this  has 
six  wings,  the  number  signifying  the  seraphic  state,  while 
the  others  have  two  or  four,  the  number  distinguishing 
cherubs.  On  either  side  of  the  Virgin  fly  four  angels 
with  pipes,  on  which  all  but  one  are  playing.  Their  limbs, 
from  the  knee  down,  are  represented  as  concealed  by 
clouds,  after  the  still  lingering  habitudes  of  more  primi- 
tive art.  The  figure  of  the  Virgin  in  the  centre  serves  as 
the  point  of  union  between  the  two  scenes, — that  of  the 
resurrection  from  earth,  represented  by  the  tomb  and  the 
saints  ; and  that  of  the  reception  into  heaven,  represented 
by  the  retinue  of  playing  angels,  and  by  those  in  frieze 
and  pediment.  The  latter  bear  the  crown  that  awaits 
the  Virgin,  the  scene  of  whose  bestowal  in  heaven 
forms  another  favorite  theme  in  Christian  sculpture. 
With  the  present  relief  may  be  compared  those  of  the 
same  subject  similarly  treated  at  La  Verna,  at  Santa 
Fiora  nel  Monte  Amiata,  and  at  Foiano,  all  works  of  the 
Robbia,  although  the  first  only  is  admitted  without  dis- 
pute to  be  from  the  hand  of  Andrea. 


Antonio  Federighi,  called  de’  Tolomei : born  in  Siena, 
and  died  there  in  1490.  Federighi  is  one  of  the  less  distinct 
figures  in  the  history  of  the  art  of  his  time  and  country.  In 
former  years  some  of  the  sculptures  on  which  his  fame  now 


92 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


chiefly  rests  were  credited  to  others  : the  holy-water  basins 
in  the  cathedral  to  his  greater  predecessor,  Jacopo  della  Quer- 
cia; the  right-hand  stone  bench  in  the  Casino  dei  Nobili  to 
Lorenzo  Marina  and  aids.  Federighi  himself,  although  prob- 
ably not  more  than  a youth  at  Quercia’s  death,  has  generally 
been  counted  among  his  scholars,  not  only  because  younger 
and  a Sienese,  but  because  his  work  suggests  Quercia  as 
that  of  no  other  sculptor  does.  There  can  at  least  be  assumed 
between  the  two  a kinship  of  artistic  nature  that  the  sight 
of  the  achievements  of  the  elder  artist  strengthened  in  the 
younger.  As  architect  he  was  engaged,  from  1451  to  1456, 
upon  the  cathedral  at  Orvieto,  and  later  upon  that  at  Siena. 
The  arcade  called  the  Loggia  del  Papa  was  begun  by  him, 
and  his  style  is  recognized  in  other  buildings  and  in  other 
plastic  works  about  the  town,  even  in  one  or  two  sculptures 
formerly  reputed  to  be  antiques.  But  in  some  of  those  to 
which  Federighi’s  name  is  given  the  cooperation  at  least  of 
less  skilful  hands  is  apparent. 

558.  Holy-Water  Basin;  one  of  two  near  the  main  por- 
tal of  the  cathedral  at  Siena. 

Of  marble;  executed  in  1462  and  1463.  A.  Schmarsow, 
“ Antonio  Federighi  de’  Tolomei,”  Repertorium  fur  Kunst- 
wissenschaft,  XII,  1889,  p.  286. 

In  the  strongly  modelled  ornamentation  of  this  basin, 
as  in  that  of  its  fellow,  we  seem  to  find  an  echo  of  the 
flamboyant  leafage  of  Quercia’s  altar  at  S.  Frediano  in 
Lucca,  and  of  the  ponderous  wreath  about  his  sarcopha- 
gus of  Ilaria  del  Carretto  in  Lucca  cathedral.  In  the 
original,  even  the  interior  contributes  its  share  of  exu- 


ANTONIO  FEDERIGHI 


93 


berant  decoration,  the  artist  having  therein  carved  re- 
presentations of  fishes.  The  classical  motives  in  which 
that  one  of  the  two  basins  which  is  here  reproduced 
especially  abounds  are  not  characteristic  of  Quercia,  and 
their  presence  helps  to  explain  the  former  opinion  that 
the  works  were  in  part  of  antique  origin.  In  this  basin 
the  decoration  of  both  bowl  and  stem  is  in  three  seg- 
ments corresponding  to  the  three  sides  of  the  truncated 
pyramid  forming  the  base.  This  rests  upon  the  heads  of 
three  four-winged  genii,  two  of  the  wings  of  each  clasp- 
ing the  angle  of  the  pyramid  as  if  to  steady  it,  while  the 
other  two  are  spread  wide  as  if  for  support  upon  the 
shallow  circular  basin  in  which  the  whole  work  is  set. 
The  ornamentation  of  each  face  of  the  base  consists  of 
a rich  garland  descending  from  the  upper  corners  of  the 
pyramid  and  containing  in  the  bend  a shell.  The  heavy 
stem  above  is  alternately  drawn  in  and  expanded  in  a 
series  of  curves  and  bands  of  ornament,  of  which  latter 
the  most  conspicuous  consists  of  a circle  of  shells  of 
different  shapes  carved  in  high  relief.  Each  garland 
rises  from  its  corner  of  the  base  until  it  winds  about 
the  feet  of  a genius  standing,  just  below  the  mouldings 
supporting  the  bowl,  upon  a dolphin.  Upon  the  stem  be- 
tween the  three  genii  appear,  carved  in  low  relief,  above, 
conventional  patterns  of  palm  leafage,  and  below,  repre- 
sentations of  genii  at  play  in  the  water.  At  first  sight 
the  three  eagles  which,  with  outstretched  wings  and 
feet  against  the  stem,  bear  up  the  bowl  between  them, 
form  a break  in  the  allusions  to  water  found  everywhere 


94  ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 

else  in  the  decorations,  but  they  prove  to  hold  in  their 
claws  three  eels,  with  tails  curling  far  upward  under  the 
bowl.  This  is  deeply  fluted  up  to  a heavy  margin,  in 
which  three  consoles  are  spaced  equally  with  three  heads 
of  winged  genii.  Between  these  the  ornament  consists 
of  a honeysuckle  pattern,  of  which  the  lowest  ramifi- 
cations are  held  in  the  mouths  of  two  dolphins  bent 
about  either  side  of  a shell.  It  is  noteworthy  that  while 
the  purpose  of  the  basin  as  a receptacle  for  water  is 
everywhere  expressed  in  the  ornament,  this  is  of  a purely 
classical  character,  and  entirely  devoid  of  any  reference 
to  Christian  faith  or  practice.  The  monument  is  in  this 
way  even  more  strongly  at  variance  with  the  spirit  of 
its  purpose  than  were  it  a veritable  product  of  antiquity, 
for  none  of  its  motives  would  then  have  been  without 
an  original  religious  significance.  This  purely  secular 
character  emphasizes  the  work  as  the  product  of  an  ar- 
tistic atmosphere  very  diverse  from  that  of  contemporary 
Florentine  sculpture,  which  was  still  full  of  thoughts 
of  another  world.  The  germ  of  whole-souled  delight  in 
mundane  existence,  which  had  lain  unfruitful  for  the 
millennium  since  antiquity,  found  nowhere  in  Italy  more 
congenial  soil  than  in  the  overflowing  fancy  of  the  sculp- 
tor of  these  basins. 


Antonio  Rossellino  : born  1427  ; died  in  Florence  1478. 
Vasari  singles  out  for  special  commendation  the  delicacy  of 
finish  of  Rossellino’s  work,  and  of  the  man  writes  that  his 


ANTONIO  ROSSELLINO 


95 


graces  of  character  won  from  all  who  knew  him  the  reverence 
paid  a saint.  The  name  of  Rossellino  (meaning  a species  of 
olive-tree)  was  a sobriquet.  His  father  was  Matteo  di  Gio- 
vanni Gamberelli,  and  of  his  four  brothers,  all  carvers  in 
stone,  one,  Bernardo,  eighteen  years  his  senior,  also  attained 
distinction  both  as  sculptor  and  as  architect.  Antonio’s  name 
first  appears  on  the  roll  of  the  assistants  in  Bernardo’s  atelier, 
and  in  1457  he  executed  for  the  cathedral  at  Empoli  a nearly 
life-size  nude  statue  of  St.  Sebastian,  which  ranks  high  among 
similar  achievements  of  Tuscan  sculpture  at  that  period.  In 
1461  he  received  the  order  for  a work  which  was  to  prove 
his  masterpiece,  the  tomb  of  the  Cardinal  of  Portugal  in  S. 
Miniato  at  Florence.  The  admiration  excited  by  this  tomb 
led  to  a commission  for  its  reproduction  in  Naples,  over  the 
remains  of  Maria  of  Arragon  in  the  Cappella  Piccolomini  in 
the  church  of  Monte  Oliveto.  In  the  same  chapel,  the  reredos 
of  the  altar,  which  is  also  from  Antonio’s  hand,  contains  a 
panel  reproducing  in  greater  elaboration  the  motives  of  his 
round  relief  of  the  Nativity  at  Florence,  of  which  the  cast  is 
described  below.  In  1473  he  executed  three  panels  for  the 
pulpit  of  Prato  cathedral.  Many  reliefs  of  the  Madonna  and 
Child  in  various  museums  in  Europe  are  attributed  to  Rossel- 
lino, and  one  in  the  church  of  Santa  Croce  at  Florence, 
the  “ Madonna  del  Latte.”  His  work  is  full  of  represen- 
tations of  childhood,  one  of  the  most  charming  examples 
being  the  statue  of  St.  John  the  Baptist  as  a boy,  in  the 
Museo  Nazionale  at  Florence.  As  a sculptor  of  the  real, 
Rossellino  is  known  by  two  masterly  busts  of  men, — one  of 
the  physician  Giovanni  di  San  Miniato,  in  the  Victoria  and 
Albert  Museum,  the  other  of  Matteo  Palmieri,  of  which  the 
cast  is  described  below. 


96 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


478.  Relief  of  the  Nativity ; in  the  Museo  Nazionale  at 
Florence. 

Of  marble  ; date  unknown,  but  regarded  as  a work  of  his 

maturity. 

In  this  relief,  and  in  the  closely  similar  panel  at  Naples, 
the  methods  of  perspective  effect  employed  by  Ghiberti 
in  his  second  bronze  doors  for  the  Baptistery  at  Florence, 
finished  during  Rossellino’s  earlier  years,  are  applied  for 
the  first  time  in  marble.  Groups  of  figures  appear  in  an 
elaborate  landscape,  at  different  distances  indicated  by 
their  larger  or  smaller  size  and  rounder  or  flatter  model- 
ling. The  Naples  panel  represents  only  the  single  step 
of  transferring  a Ghiberti  relief  to  another  material ; it 
retains  the  square  field,  and  in  a conspicuous  detail  — a 
circle  of  angels  dancing  upon  the  cloud  about  a mountain- 
top  — recalls  Ghiberti’s  Creation  of  Man.  But  the  Flor- 
entine work  presents  another  novelty  in  the  use  of  a^pop- 
ulous  scene  like  those  of  the  older  artist  as  the  background 
for  a round  relief  of  the  Madonna  and  Child  like  others  by 
Rossellino  himself  and  his  contemporaries.  The  more 
purely  imitative  character  of  the  Naples  panel  suggests 
priority  in  date  ; but  it  is  perhaps  quite  as  likely  that  the 
round  relief  with  its  mixture  of  styles  was  the  tentative 
essay,  and  the  panel  the  maturer  achievement.  Whether 
the  outcome  of  a more  complete  or  of  a less  complete 
mastery  of  the  two  manners  it  reflects,  their  blending  in 
the  present  relief  has  been  most  fortunate.  As  in  the 
contemporary  round  reliefs  of  the  Madonna,  the  mother 
and  her  infant  form  an  independent  group,  here  distin- 


ANTONIO  ROSSELLINO 


97 


guished  not  only  through  their  superiority  in  size  to  the 
background  figures,  but  by  their  position  among  an  attend' 
ant  circle  of  cherubs  forming  a frame  for  the  rest  of  the 
composition.  While  the  simple  motive  of  the  Adoration 
thus  dominates  the  work  — often  indeed  called  by  that 
name — others  of  great  beauty  and  interest  are  combined 
with  it  in  a rich  and  harmonious  unity.  The  cherubs’ 
heads  are  in  high  relief,  each  pair  separated  by  a star  be- 
tween two  clouds.  The  mantle  of  the  Madonna  trails 
among  them,  and  with  the  body  of  the  child  and  his 
cushion  half  covers  the  two  lowermost.  The  figure  of  the 
Madonna  is  one  of  especial  charm.  Behind  her  on  the  left 
in  the  middle  distance  Joseph  appears  seated,  the  fin- 
gers of  one  hand  thrust  through  his  beard.  Beyond,  the 
stable,  stone  with  a thatched  roof ; and  the  ox  and  the 
ass  feeding.  On  the  right,  beyond  and  above  a crag  like 
those  in  Ghiberti’s  landscapes,  two  scenes  image  the 
part  played  by  the  shepherds  in  the  story  of  the  Nativity. 
In  the  extreme  background  a flock  of  sheep,  the  level 
lines  of  their  backs  testifying  to  their  nocturnal  quiet, 
are  gathered  between  their  two  keepers.  One  of  these  is 
seated  near  trees  at  the  foot  of  a declivity,  and  is  absorbed 
in  playing  on  bagpipes.  The  other  stands  at  ease  with 
crossed  feet,  leaning  on  his  staff ; and  both  he  and  the 
dog  at  his  side  glance  up  at  an  angel  descending  toward 
them.  Below,  in  the  middle  distance,  the  two  appear 
again,  walking  side  by  side,  with  staves  over  their  shoul- 
ders, from  one  of  which  a lamb  is  suspended  by  the 
feet.  The  other  shepherd  looks  up,  his  hand  before  his 


98 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


forehead,  as  if  bewildered  and  blinded  by  light  from 
heaven. 

A replica  of  this  relief,  in  terra-cotta  and  varying  from 
it  in  many  details,  is  preserved  in  the  Berlin  Museum, 
and  is  thought  to  have  been  the  original  model  for  the 
work. 

464.  Bust  of  Matteo  Palmieri ; in  the  Museo  Nazionale 
at  Florence. 

Of  marble;  signed  and  dated  1468. 

The  roughness  of  surface  of  this  bust  is  explained  by 
its  exposure  for  many  years  to  the  weather  at  the  door  of 
the  family  mansion.  Palmieri  is  here  represented  at  the 
age  of  sixty-three.  Fervor  of  nature  as  well  as  force  of 
mind  speaks  in  the  coarsely  hewn,  almost  quizzical  face. 
A carelessness  in  dress  even,  the  gaping  opening  below 
the  collar,  contributes  to  the  suggestion  of  character. 
Palmieri  was  historian  as  well  as  diplomat,  and  left  a 
poem  in  manuscript,  “ Citta  di  Vita,”  which  was  burned, 
by  decree  of  the  church,  after  his  death. 


Desiderio  da  Settignano  : born  at  Settignano,  a village 
near  Florence,  in  1428 ; died  1464.  Of  Desiderio’s  short  life 
but  few  details  are  known.  He  is  reported  to  have  been  a 
pupil  of  Donatello,  and  without  doubt  was  mainly  influenced 
by  his  works,  although  Donatello  himself  was  already  in  his 
prime  and  famous  when  Desiderio  was  born,  and  was  absent 
in  Padua  during  his  adolescent  years.  Yet  it  is  not  as  the 


DESIDERI 0 DA  SETTIGNANO 


99 


bearer  of  any  artistic  tradition  that  Desiderio  is  chiefly  remem- 
bered, but  as  the  possessor  of  a certain  happy  grace  of  style, 
which  was  a purely  personal  gift.  Vasari  quotes  an  epigram 
placed  on  his  tomb,  one  of  many  called  forth  by  his  untimely 
end,  that  in  a way  anticipates  the  epitaph  of  Raphael  in  the 
Pantheon  : “Nature,  fearing  he  might  excel  her,  cut  off  his 
days  ; but  in  vain  ; for  the  marble  he  had  made  to  live  for- 
ever gave  him  in  turn  immortality.”  His  chief  works  are  the 
marble  tomb  of  Carlo  Marsuppini  in  Santa  Croce  at  Florence, 
and  the  marble  tabernacle  of  the  Sacrament  in  the  church 
of  San  Lorenzo.  Vasari  enumerates  many  other  works  now 
either  lost  or  of  uncertain  identification.  A bust  of  a young 
woman,  formerly  in  the  gardens  of  the  Palazzo  Strozzi  at 
Florence,  but  now  in  the  Berlin  Museum  (No.  412.4  below), 
was  long  admired  as  the  bust  of  Marietta  Strozzi  mentioned 
by  Vasari ; but  the  names  of  both  artist  and  model  have  since 
been  associated  with  another  bust  in  the  Berlin  Museum  (No. 
62)  and  with  still  another,  discovered  of  late  years  in  a muti- 
lated condition  in  the  same  gardens.  A number  of  other 
busts  of  young  women  and  of  boys,  apparently  portraits,  have 
the  same  delicacy  of  form  and  of  workmanship,  and  convey 
the  same  suggestions  of  soft  flesh  and  of  gaily  coursing  blood 
that  are  wrought  into  the  figures  on  the  tomb  and  the  taber- 
nacle, and  are  hence  by  one  or  another  authority  attributed 
to  Desiderio.  Among  them  is  the  relief  called  St.  Cecilia, 
heretofore  ascribed  to  Donatello,  of  which  the  cast  is  men- 
tioned above,  and  the  busts  of  boys  and  of  a young  woman 
about  to  be  described.  A relief  of  the  Madonna  and  Child 
on  the  Panciatichi  Palace, Via Cavour,  Florence,  is  also  thought 
to  be  by  Desiderio. 


100 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


413.7.  Sarcophagus  with  Two  Attendant  Genii;  from 
the  tomb  of  Carlo  Marsuppini,  in  the  church  of  Santa 
Croce  at  Florence. 

Of  marble.  Marsuppini  died  1455. 

Carlo  Marsuppini,  at  first  professor  of  belles  lettres, 
then  secretary  to  Pope  Eugene  IV,  and  for  the  ten  years 
before  his  death  in  1455  secretary  of  state  to  the  Flor- 
entine commonwealth,  was  a man  of  great  reputation 
among  his  contemporaries  for  learning  and  literary 
ability.  Only  a few  verses  of  minor  importance  survive 
him,  and  he  is  chiefly  remembered  through  the  master- 
piece of  sculpture  erected  in  Santa  Croce  over  his 
remains.  In  this  tomb  Desiderio  followed  the  general 
scheme  .of  that  set  up  a few  years  before  in  the  same 
church  by  the  architect  and  sculptor,  Bernardo  Rossel- 
lino,  in  memory  of  Leonardo  Bruni,  Marsuppini’s  prede- 
cessor in  the  secretaryship.  The  plan  of  this  tomb, 
which  was  original  with  Rossellino,  was  that  of  a shallow 
niche,  containing  a sarcophagus  with  the  recumbent 
effigy  of  the  dead,  flanked  by  Corinthian  pilasters  bear- 
ing an  entablature  surmounted  by  an  arch  ornamented 
with  boyish  figures  bearing  a heavy  garland  and  contain- 
ing a round  relief  of  the  Madonna  and  Child  supported 
on  either  side  by  an  angel.  In  accordance  with  the  bent 
of  Desiderio’s  talent,  the  changes  introduced  by  him  in 
this  design  transformed  the  tomb  from  a work  primarily 
of  architectural  interest  into  one  whose  chief  importance 
is  derived  from  its  wealth  of  sculptures.  The  particular 
character  of  these  was  a smiling  grace  in  which  the 


DESIDERIO  DA  SETTIGNANO 


IOI 


youthful  artist  expressed  his  own  fortunate  endowment 
quite  without  reference  to  the  solemn  purpose  of  his 
work.  Vasari  writes  that  the  leafage  sculptured  at  the 
ends  of  the  sarcophagus,  “although  somewhat  thorny 
and  dry,  was  regarded  as  most  beautiful,  little  antique 
work  having  at  that  time  been  discovered,”  and  himself 
praises  the  feathery  plumage  on  the  wings  beneath,  the 
deceptive  verisimilitude  of  the  shell  between  them,  and 
the  charming  vivacity  of  the  boyish  and  angelic  figures 
about  the  monument.  Of  these,  the  two  little  winged 
sprites,  supporting  emblazoned  shields  by  ribbons  in 
their  hands  and  about  their  necks,  which  stand  at  the 
base  of  the  two  pilasters,  are  instinct  with  the  infantile 
life  Desiderio  so  loved  to  portray. 

Attributed  to  Desiderio  da  Settignano. 

450,  458.  Two  Busts  of  Boys  ; the  former  in  the  Dreyfus 
collection  at  Paris. 

Of  marble. 

These  busts  represent  baby  boys,  not  far  from  the 
same  age,  and  with  the  same  light  drapery  across  their 
shoulders.  The  former,  which  is  modelled  with  a fasci- 
nating lifelikeness,  has  also  been  ascribed  to  Donatello. 

412.  Bust  of  a Young  Woman  (called  a Princess  of 
Urbino)  ; in  the  Berlin  Museum. 

Of  fine  limestone. 

A plaster  bust  in  the  collection  of  Lord  Wemyss  at 
London  is  so  similar  to  this  in  the  bearing,  the  facial 


102 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


expression,  and  the  arrangement  of  the  hair  of  the  sub- 
ject, although  its  rounder  and  more  developed  features 
and  figure  suggest  riper  years,  that  it  is  thought  to  have 
been  the  model  for  the  present  work.  It  has  been  re- 
marked that  a certain  want  of  flexibility  in  the  forms  of 
the  bust  here  reproduced  is  not  characteristic  of  Desi- 
derio.  But  theproud  composure  of  face  and  attitude,  the 
coolly  scrutinizing  glance  of  the  beautiful  young  gentle- 
woman it  portrays,  are  rendered  with  an  insight,  a 
fidelity,  and  an  imaginative  grace  that  would  do  honor 
to  any  sculptor.  The  simple  elegance  of  the  embroid- 
ered bodice,  with  its  fine  inner  tunic,  and  the  unassum- 
ing perfection  of  the  headdress,  where  nothing  is  stiff 
or  pronounced,  nor  is  a hair  awry,  add  their  share  to 
the  effect  of  patrician  distinction,  possibly  a little  over- 
conscious of  itself.  The  Barberini  Palace  at  Rome, 
where  the  bust  was  formerly  preserved,  was  built  for 
Pope  Urban  VIII  of  that  family,  during  whose  pontifi- 
cate in  1626  the  Duchy  of  Urbino  became  part  of  the 
States  of  the  Church. 


Antonio  Pollaiuolo:  born  1429  (1433  ?)  ; died  1498.  In 
several  ways  Pollaiuolo  is  an  exceptional  figure  among  the 
sculptors  of  Florence.  He  is  known  to  us  not  only  as  sculp- 
tor, but  as  painter,  engraver,  and  goldsmith,  in  which  latter 
art  he  excelled  all  others  of  his  time.  He  and  his  brother 
Piero  are  said  to  have  been  the  first  in  Florence  to  study 
artistic  anatomy  by  means  of  the  dissection  of  human  corpses, 


ANTONIO  POLLAIUOLO 


103 


a rupture  with  traditional  opinion  which  lessens  our  wonder 
at  the  paucity  of  specifically  religious  subjects  among  An- 
tonio’s works.  His  style  had  its  novel  side  as  well ; for  the 
forms  of  Florentine  sculpture,  complex  and  exuberant  as  they 
had  grown  in  the  work  of  Ghiberti,  approached  the  point  of 
extravagance  first  in  that  of  Pollaiuolo.  He  was  the  son  and 
pupil  of  a goldsmith,  and,  as  one  of  Ghiberti’s  assistants  on 
the  eastern  Baptistery  doors,  is  said  to  have  sculptured  the 
quail  perched  upon  ears  of  wheat  in  the  centre  of  the  left-hand 
frieze.  Already  in  Vasari’s  time  “the  needs  of  the  city  in 
time  of  war  ” had  brought  many  of  Pollaiuolo’s  achievements 
as  a goldsmith  to  the  melting-pot,  and  their  only  representa- 
tives are  now  a panel  of  the  Birth  of  John  the  Baptist  and  the 
lower  part  of  a crucifix,  both  from  the  silver  altar  of  the  Bap- 
tistery and  preserved  in  the  Cathedral  Museum.  Drawings 
for  paintings  attributed  to  his  brother  still  survive  and  illus- 
trate the  remark  of  Cellini  in  his  “ Oreficeria,”  that  Polla- 
iuolo’s designs  were  of  aid  to  other  artists ; but  the  exact 
share  of  each  brother  in  the  paintings  that  go  by  the  family 
name  is  not  clearly  made  out.  Pollaiuolo  was  one  of  the 
contestants  in  the  competition  for  the  monument  to  Francesco 
Sforza  at  Milan,  in  which  Leonardo  da  Vinci  was  victor,  and 
a design  for  the  monument  preserved  in  the  Royal  Print  Col- 
lection at  Munich  is  ascribed  to  him.  In  sculpture,  beside  the 
bust  mentioned  below,  a bronze  group  of  Hercules  and  Cacus 
is  preserved  in  the  Museo  Nazionale  at  Florence  ; but  the 
principal  works  of  Pollaiuolo  are  two  bronze  tombs,  of  Pope 
Sixtus  IV  (1493)  and  Pope  Innocent  VIII,  in  St.  Peter’s 
at  Rome,  whither  he  was  called  by  the  latter  pontiff  to  erect 
a monument  for  his  predecessor,  and  where  he  remained  to 
perform  the  same  office  for  his  patron.  Both  tombs  are  de- 


104 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


partures  from  types  current  in  his  day.  That  of  Sixtus  IV  is 
a development  from  the  motive  of  a figure  lying  in  state.  A 
recumbent  effigy  of  the  pope  rests  upon  a broad  low  base  with 
concave  sides  richly  ornamented  with  symbolic  figures  of 
women  in  lower  or  higher  relief.  That  of  Innocent  VIII  is  a 
mural  tomb,  in  its  original  form  exhibiting  a motive  not  wholly 
dissimilar  to  that  of  the  tomb  of  Bishop  Salutati,  to  be  de- 
scribed below,  executed  many  years  before  by  Mino  da  Fiesole. 
Above  a recumbent  effigy  of  the  pope  on  an  elaborate  sar- 
cophagus, he  appears  again  seated,  surrounded  by  symbolic 
figures  of  women.  In  the  arched  panel  which  crowns  the  work, 
and  in  front  of  which  the  sarcophagus  was  originally  placed, 
the  figure  of  Charity  with  a horn  of  plenty  occupies  a field 
whose  central  position  and  oval  outline  would  otherwise 
identify  it  as  the  “ amande  mystique  ” of  the  Madonna. 

414.  Bust  of  a Soldier  in  Armor ; in  the  Museo  Nazio- 
nale  at  Florence. 

Of  terra-cotta.  Date  and  provenience  unknown. 

In  this  bust  both  arms  have  been  broken  off  at  the 
shoulder,  and  on  the  small  casque  crowning  the  long, 
even  shock  of  hair,  two  scaly  legs  with  claws  are  all 
that  remains  of  a dragon  crest.  These  mutilations  in- 
terfere but  little  with  the  interest  of  the  work,  perhaps 
because  their  ragged  look  is  not  out  of  keeping  with  an 
air  of  gaminerie  in  the  head  itself.  In  this,  the  level 
eyes,  the  unmoved  mouth,  the  stiff,  straight  neck,  the 
hair  rolling  back  as  if  in  the  movement  of  glancing  up 
to  meet  some  challenge,  all  vigorously  image  the  boyish 
fighter  for  fighting’s  sake.  To  the  same  end  the  cuirass 


ANTONIO  POLLAIUOLO  1 05 

is  ornamented  with  reliefs  of  heroic  themes  ; on  the  left 
Hercules  and  the  Lernaean  Hydra,  on  the  right,  by  a 
piquant  opposition,  Samson,  his  long  hair  streaming  in 
the  wind,  swinging  the  broken  withes  with  which  the 
Philistines  had  sought  to  bind  him  ; and  in  the  centre  a 
profile  head  with  the  laurel  crown  of  victory.  The  his- 
tory of  this  work  is  not  needed  to  fasten  the  authorship 
of  so  sympathetic  a rendering  of  the  pugnacious  mood 
upon  the  venturesome  spirit  that  cut  loose  from  Ghi- 
berti, entered  the  lists  with  da  Vinci,  and  dared  to 
choose  the  figures  of  beautiful  women  for  the  sole  dec- 
oration of  papal  tombs.  The  shallow  modelling  of  the 
eyes  is  noticeable  also  in  the  terra-cotta  bust  of  Charles 
VIII  in  the  Museo  Nazionale,  of  which  Pollaiuolo  has 
been  surmised  the  author. 

Formerly  attributed  to  Pollaiuolo  ; now  thought  to 
be  by  Verrocchio. 

449.  Bust  of  a Young  Man  ; in  the  Museo  Nazionale  at 
Florence. 

Of  terra-cotta.  Date  and  provenience  unknown. 

The  quiet  dignity  of  this  bust  represents  a wholly 
different  artistic  atmosphere  from  that  in  which  Polla- 
iuolo worked,  and  it  is  not  surprising  that  another  name 
than  his  is  now  associated  with  it.  A sobriety  of  air, 
lacking  neither  in  character  nor  in  charm,  has  given  it 
the  title  of  the  young  cleric  or  scholar,  but  whether  the 
serious-minded  young  Florentine  it  portrays  was  a real 
person  or  the  fancy  of  the  sculptor  is  not  known. 


io6 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


Andrea  di  Michele  di  Francesco  de’  Cioni,  called  del 
Verrocchio  : born  in  Florence,  1436  ; died  in  Venice,  1488. 
Like  Pollaiuolo,  Verrocchio  began  his  artistic  career  in  the 
workshop  of  a goldsmith,  Giuliano  de’  Verrocchi,  by  whose 
surname  he  was  thereafter  to  be  known.  Like  Pollaiuolo 
again,  his  contribution  to  the  silver  altar  of  the  Baptistery,  a 
panel  of  the  Decollation  of  St.  John  the  Baptist,  completed 
in  1480,  is  the  only  surviving  specimen  of  his  skill  in  that 
art.  While  Vasari  names  no  one  as  Verrocchio’s  master,  he 
is  reported  by  other  old  authorities  to  have  aided  Donatello, 
then  a septuagenarian,  in  executing  the  marble  basin  for  the 
sacristy  of  San  Lorenzo,  and  is  spoken  of  as  his  pupil.  It  is 
no  small  factor  in  Verrocchio’s  own  fame  that  in  another  art 
from  that  by  which  he  is  chiefly  known,  he  should  have  left 
behind  him  pupils  as  distinguished  as  the  painters  Lorenzo 
di  Credi,  Perugino,  and  above  all  Leonardo  da  Vinci.  The 
single  existing  picture  known  to  be  by  Verrocchio,  an  unfin- 
ished Baptism  of  Christ  in  the  Accademia  delle  Belle  Arti  in 
Florence,  contains  the  figure  of  an  angel  by  Leonardo  in 
view  of  whose  marked  superiority  to  the  rest  of  the  work 
Verrocchio  is  said  to  have  renounced  the  art  of  painting. 
Vasari  relates  that  Verrocchio  used  to  study  the  human  fig- 
ure with  the  aid  of  casts  from  life,  and  there  are  in  existence 
several  portrait  busts  that  are  thought  to  exhibit  his  style. 

It  was  doubtless  his  early  collaboration  with  Donatello  that 
brought  to  Verrocchio  the  commission  for  the  tomb  erected 
in  the  sacristy  at  S.  Lorenzo  on  the  order  of  Lorenzo  de’ 
Medici  in  memory  of  his  father  Piero  and  of  his  uncle  Gio- 
vanni. This  tomb,  finished  in  1472,  consists  of  a red  por- 
phyry sarcophagus,  ornamented  with  bronze  foliage,  doubtless 
originally  gilded,  and  set  in  an  archway  of  which  the  remain- 


VERROCCHIO 


107 


in g opening  is  filled  with  a bronze  network  representing  cord- 
age. The  conception  is  novel,  and  the  execution  a masterly 
example  of  the  caster’s  art.  On  further  commissions  from 
Lorenzo  de’  Medici,  Verrocchio  executed  the  bronze  group 
of  a Cupid  holding  a Dolphin,  and  the  bronze  statue  of 
David,  of  both  of  which  the  casts  are  described  below.  In 
1477  his  powerful  patron  decided  in  favor  of  Verrocchio  in  a 
disputed  competition  with  Pollaiuolo  for  a cenotaph  to  Car- 
dinal Forteguerra  in  the  cathedral  at  Pistoia,  but  Verrocchio 
never  completed  the  work,  and  of  the  monument  as  it  stands 
only  the  upper  figures  in  relief  are  his.  That  of  Faith  and  the 
figure  of  the  Madonna  in  a terra-cotta  relief  in  the  Hospital 
of  S.  Maria  Nuova  at  Florence  resemble  one  another  like 
two  beautiful  sisters,  and  the  latter  work,  with  another  in 
marble  in  the  Museo  Nazionale,  has  also  been  attributed  to 
Verrocchio.  To  the  adornment  of  a chapel  for  St.  Peter’s 
at  Rome,  just  then  in  process  of  construction  by  Pope  Sixtus 
IV  (on  the  site  of  the  present  Coro  dei  Canonici),  Verrocchio 
contributed  several  large  silver  statues  of  the  apostles,  which 
in  the  last  century  were  stolen  from  their  place  and  never  re- 
covered ; and  to  the  same  period  belongs  the  fragment  from 
the  lost  monument  to  Francesca  Tornabuoni,  of  which  the 
cast  is  described  below.  Better  fortune  attended  Verrocchio’s 
next  important  work,  the  bronze  group  of  Christ  and  St. 
Thomas,  still  standing  in  a niche  on  the  front  of  Or  San 
Michele  in  Florence,  ordered  in  1464,  completed  in  1483. 
The  niche  had  many  years  before  been  made  ready  by  Dona- 
tello for  the  projected  group,  but  the  authorities  were  hope- 
lessly divided  as  to  whether  he  or  Ghiberti  should  furnish 
it,  and  the  task  was  intrusted  to  Verrocchio  only  after  the 
death  of  both  the  others.  Before  it  was  completed,  in 


io8 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


1479,  Verrocchio  received  another  and  even  more  important 
commission,  this  time  from  the  Republic  of  Venice,  which 
the  famous  condottiere,  Bartolommeo  da  Bergamo,  called 
Colleoni,  had  made  heir  to  all  his  wealth  upon  the  condition 
that  a statue  of  himself  should  be  erected  in  that  city.  If 
Vasari  is  right  in  saying  that  a capacity  for  infinite  pains 
made  amends  in  Verrocchio  for  a lack  of  natural  facility, 
it  was  again,  as  perhaps  in  the  unfinished  painting  in  Flor- 
ence and  the  unfinished  tomb  in  Pistoia,  to  prove  unequal 
to  the  task  it  set  itself,  for  Verrocchio  died  nine  years  later 
of  a chill  received  after  casting  the  figure  of  the  horse.  He 
had  once  abandoned  the  work  because  the  commission  for 
the  figure  had  been  withdrawn  to  be  given  to  Bellano  of 
Padua,  and  although  at  first  forbidden  on  pain  of  death  to 
reenter  Venice,  had  ended  by  returning  to  his  great  task  on 
condition  of  fulfilling  it  all  himself.  His  body  was  brought 
back  to  Florence  by  his  faithful  pupil  Lorenzo  di  Credi,  to 
whom  he  had  in  vain  endeavored  by  his  will  to  have  the  pro- 
secution of  the  work  intrusted  ; and  the  monument  was  com- 
pleted by  a Venetian  artist,  Alessandro  Leopardi,  called 
therefrom  Alessandro  del  Cavallo.  It  is  still  impossible  to 
say  with  exactness  how  much  of  the  credit  for  the  greatest 
equestrian  statue  in  the  world  is  due  to  the  latter,  and  how 
much  to  the  man  who  originally  conceived  it,  and  who  but 
for  an  unkind  fate  might  be  named  as  its  sole  author. 

461.  Statue  of  David;  in  the  Museo  Nazionale  at  Florence. 

Of  bronze;  executed  for  Lorenzo  de’  Medici  before  1476. 

David  is  represented  as  a slim  youth  in  early  adoles- 
cence, standing  at  ease,  with  the  left  arm  akimbo,  and 
grasping  in  his  right  hand  the  short  sword  of  Goliath, 


VERROCCHIO 


I09 


whose  severed  head  lies  against  the  raised  left  foot  of 
the  boy.  A kind  of  kilted  corselet,  and  the  high  hunting- 
sandals,  also  worn  by  Donatello’s  David,  executed  for 
Lorenzo’s  grandfather  Cosimo  forty  years  before,  are 
all  his  clothing.  His  glance  is  directed  outward,  as  if 
toward  bystanders,  and  not  at  the  giant’s  body.  The 
single  reference  in  the  work  to  the  biblical  origin  of  its 
subject  is  perhaps  to  be  found  in  the  curious  ornament 
on  the  border  of  David’s  armor,  like  an  imitation  of 
Hebrew  lettering.  The  right  arm  still  tense,  and  with 
swollen  veins,  is  all  that  tells  of  a conflict.  Otherwise 
the  figure  is  not  that  of  a victor  in  mortal  encounter, 
standing,  like  Donatello’s  David,  as  if  absorbed  in  the 
vast  bulk  become  his  prey,  but  that  of  a charming  boy, 
with  curly  locks,  gentle  glance,  and  sweet  pouting  lips, 
in  a posture  somewhat  constrained,  as  if  ill  at  ease  under 
admiration.  With  its  emphatic  and  detailed  modelling, 
the  statue  is  even  more  effective  in  the  cast  than  is  that 
of  Donatello  with  its  rounder  and  smoother  forms,  and 
appears  of  even  greater  verity,  less  an  Apollo  than  a 
modest  and  graceful  urchin  of  the  Florentine  streets, 
lean  and  immature  still,  but  with  the  promise  of  perfec- 
tion in  build. 


400.5.  Statue  of  a Cupid  holding  a Dolphin ; crown- 
ing the  fountain  in  the  courtyard  of  the  Palazzo  Vecchio 
at  Florence. 

Of  bronze ; executed  for  Lorenzo  de’  Medici  perhaps 
about  1474. 


IIO 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


This  little  group  was  not  originally  designed  for  the 
sombre  courtyard  of  the  Palazzo  Vecchio,  but  for  the 
Medicean  Villa  at  Careggi,  on  the  hills  northwest  of 
Florence,  built  by  Cosmo  de’  Medici  and  a favorite  re- 
treat of  his  grandson,  Lorenzo.  The  conception  of  the 
work,  that  of  an  infantile  genius  holding  a struggling 
fish,  recalls  two  motives  of  classical  art,  preserved  to  us 
in  the  group  of  Eros  and  the  Dolphin  at  Naples  (No.  549 
in  our  collection  of  casts)  and  in  the  Boy  with  a Goose 
in  the  Louvre  and  elsewhere  (our  No.  568,  at  present 
withdrawn  from  exhibition).  The  actors  are  those  of 
the  former  group,  the  dimensions  those  of  the  latter ; 
while  the  situation  is  half  way  between  the  fraternal 
play  of  the  first  and  the  desperate  comedy  of  combat  in 
the  second.  Although  neither  Lorenzo,  in  giving  the 
commission,  nor  Verrocchio,  in  executing  it,  may  have 
had  any  antique  work  in  mind,  a little  suspicion  of  the 
theatrical  in  the  lackadaisical  head  of  this  Cupid,  with 
its  sweet  mouth  and  elaborated  locks,  and  in  his  jaunty 
dancing  step  and  poise  of  elbows,  suggests  a borrowed 
motive,  — one  not  invented  but  imitated.  The  fish  is 
hardly  realistic,  except  in  the  convulsive  twist  of  his 
tail ; and  the  sentiment  of  the  work  seems  less  a natural 
pleasure  in  the  pranks  of  childhood  than  an  admiration 
for  the  art  which  can  commemorate  them.  In  the  cast 
the  wings  are  fastened  on  outside  the  drapery ; and  if 
attached  similarly  in  the  original  would  appear  an  after- 
thought, although  so  intimately  a part  of  the  design  that 
this  can  hardly  be  believed;  or  perhaps  Verrocchio 


VERROCCHIO 


III 


allowed  himself  this  inconsistency  in  a creation  so  fanci- 
ful. Whatever  its  origin,  the  work  remains  a master- 
piece, not  only  of  a rarely  harmonious  flow  of  line  on 
every  side,  from  wings  to  tips  of  toes,  but  of  a vigor  of 
configuration  and  of  light  and  shade  one  would  hardly 
have  believed  possible  within  its  diminutive  compass. 
The  power  of  Verrocchio’s  modelling,  his  love  for  strongly 
marked  and  complicated  form,  is  especially  conspicuous 
from  the  direction  in  which  the  fish’s  head  points. 

480.  Panel  from  the  Tomb  of  Francesca  Tornabuoni ; 

in  the  Museo  Nazionale  at  Florence. 

Of  marble;  executed  after  1477.  E.  Miintz,  “A.  Verroc- 
chio et  le  tombeau  de  Francesca  Tornabuoni,”  Gazette  des 
Beaux  Arts,  1891,  VI,  p.  277;  F.  Schottmiiller,  “Zwei 
Grabmaler  der  Renaissance  und  ihre  antike  Vorbilder,” 
Repertorium  fur  Kunstwissenschaft,  XXV,  1902,  p.  401. 

According  to  Vasari,  the  first  work  in  marble  ex- 
ecuted by  Verrocchio  was  a tomb  in  S.  Maria  sopra 
Minerva  at  Rome,  erected  by  Francesco  Tornabuoni  in 
memory  of  a dearly  loved  wife,  and  containing,  beside 
three  figures  of  Virtues,  a panel  above  the  sarcophagus, 
representing  the  death  of  the  mother  at  the  birth  of  her 
child.  The  present  panel,  another  representing  the  pre- 
sentation of  the  child  to  its  father,  also  preserved  at  the 
Museo  Nazionale,  and  four  figures  of  Virtues  in  the  col- 
lection of  Madame  Andre  at  Paris,  are  accepted  as  frag- 
jj  ments  of  this  work.  Vasari’s  account  of  it  is  thought 
inexact  both  in  the  name  of  the  husband  (for  Francesco 
read  Giovanni),  the  description  of  the  work  (for  a single 


1 1 2 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


panel  read  a double  one,  for  three  Virtues  read  four),  and 
possibly  also  in  respect  to  its  original  place  (for  S.  Maria 
sopra  Minerva  at  Rome  read  S.  Maria  Novella  at  Flor- 
ence). The  painful  subject  of  the  work  is  represented 
with  an  earnest  fidelity  not  throughout  free  from  extrava- 
gance. The  deathbed  of  the  mother  is  a wild  tumult  of 
outlines,  in  marked  contrast  with  the  quiet  modelling  in 
the  other  scene.  The  figure  in  armor  on  the  extreme 
left  of  the  latter  has  the  long  curling  locks  and  rounded 
cheeks  of  Verrocchio’s  St.  Thomas  at  Or  San  Michele, 
but  other  figures  are  less  well  proportioned,  and  seem  to 
bear  witness  to  the  inexperience  of  the  artist  in  the 
carving  of  marble.  A Roman  sarcophagus  with  the 
story  of  Alcestis,  now  preserved  in  the  Villa  Faustina  at 
Cannes,  but  formerly  in  Rome,  is  surmised  to  have 
served  Verrocchio  as  a model  in  the  composition  of 
these  reliefs. 


Mino  da  Fiesole:  born  1431  at  Poppi,  in  the  upper  val- 
ley of  the  Arno;  died  nth  July,  1484,  at  Florence.  The 
sculptures  attributed  to  Mino  da  Fiesole  possess  an  excep- 
tional sweetness  and  grace  that  have  from  the  first  won  for 
them  the  highest  favor  with  the  public.  The  critics,  begin- 
ning even  with  Vasari,  while  acknowledging  this  quality  in 
Mino’s  works,  have  always  dwelt  upon  the  monotony  of  their 
beauty,  and  upon  a frequent  incapacity,  and  even  rudeness, 
in  the  sculptor’s  handling  of  his  conceptions.  Vasari  writes 
that  Mino  was  inspired  less  by  nature  than  by  the  example  of 
Desiderio  da  Settignano,  who  employed  him  as  a stonecutter, 


MINO  DA  FIESOLE 


1 13 

and  whose  works  he  copied  in  his  earliest  essays  at  sculpture. 
Such  an  introduction  to  the  art  may  explain  not  only  Mino’s 
exclusive  devotion  to  the  manner  of  his  young  master,  but 
also  the  lack  of  training  to  which  Vasari  alludes  in  calling 
him  “ more  gifted  than  grounded  in  art,”  and  of  which  his 
sculptures  give  ample  evidence.  They  are  full  of  charming 
ideas  inadequately  worked  out,  like  the  productions  of  an 
amateur,  and  at  times  exhibit  technical  Shortcomings  which 
are  truly  amazing ; as  in  the  panel  representing  Herod’s  feast, 
from  the  pulpit  in  Prato  cathedral  (1473),  with  its  childishly 
ill-proportioned  and  ill-modelled  figures.  Mino  never  amended 
his  defective  style  ; and  his  success  and  the  lasting  popularity 
of  his  works  bear  witness  to  high  artistic  qualities  which  his 
faults  could  not  conceal.  The  cathedral  at  Fiesole  and  the 
near-by  monastery  of  the  Badia  contain  five  of  Mino’s  most 
elaborate  works.  At  Fiesole  a reredos  with  figures  of  the 
Madonna  and  Child  between  SS.  Leonard  and  Remigius,  a 
work  of  great  refinement,  in  an  architectural  setting  of  much 
elegance  ; and  the  tomb  of  Bishop  Salutati  (d.  1466),  novel 
in  conception,  beautifully  decorated,  and  containing  in  the 
bust  of  the  Bishop  a study  from  the  real  whose  living  truth  is 
unsurpassed  in  the  work  of  any  of  Mino’s  contemporaries. 
Other  portrait  busts,  either  signed  by,  or  on  other  grounds 
ascribed  to  Mino,  are  of  not  unlike  quality ; among  them 
those  of  Piero  de’  Medici  (about  1454)  and  Rinaldo  della 
Luna  (1461)  in  the  Museo  Nazionale  at  Florence;  Niccolo 
Strozzi  (1454)  in  the  Berlin  Museum  ; and  Diotisalvi  Neroni 
(1464)  in  the  Dreyfus  collection  in  Paris.  The  church  of  the 
Badia  contains  a reredos  (completed  1470)  like  that  at  Fiesole, 
with  figures  of  SS.  Lorenzo  and  Leonard  (a  tabernacle  in 
similar  form  at  S.  Pietro  in  Perugia),  and  in  the  transepts 


14 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


two  tombs,  one  that  of  Bernardo  Giugni  (d.  1466),  the  other 
and  finer  (1469-81)  in  memory  of  Count  Hugo  of  Andeburg 
(d.  1006),  the  benefactor  of  the  monastery;  both  in  the  style 
of  Desiderio’s  Marsuppini  monument  at  Santa  Croce.  The 
charming  relief  of  the  Madonna  and  Child,  formerly  over  the 
door  of  the  church,  is  now  preserved  in  the  Museo  Nazionale 
at  Florence.  Vasari  names  two  other  works  in  that  city  which 
are  still  preserved : a ciborium,  or  tabernacle  for  the  eucha- 
rist,  in  the  Cappella  Medici  at  Santa  Croce  (executed  for  the 
convent  of  the  Muratte),  and  another  in  the  church  of  S.  Am- 
brogio.  Similar  tabernacles  ascribed  to  Mino  exist  in  Rome 
in  the  churches  of  S.  Marco  and  S.  Maria  in  Trastevere, 
another  in  the  Baptistery  at  Volterra  ; but  of  several  more 
important  works  which  Mino  executed  in  that  city  only  scat- 
tered fragments  remain.  The  tomb  of  Paul  II  (d.  1471)  in  old 
St.  Peter’s  was  taken  down  when  the  present  church  was  begun, 
and  parts  of  it  are  preserved  in  the  Grotte  of  the  Vatican. 
Four  panels  illustrating  the  life  of  St.  Jerome,  preserved  in 
the  Museo  Artistico-Industriale,  are  now  supposed  to  be  frag- 
ments of  the  altar  in  the  chapel  of  that  saint  (now  destroyed) 
in  S.  Maria  Maggiore  (1463),  ordered  of  Mino,  according  to 
Vasari,  by  Cardinal  d’Estouteville.  Of  much  higher  quality, 
and  among  the  most  fascinating  of  Mino’s  creations,  are  the 
remains  at  S.  Maria  Maggiore  of  the  ciborium  erected  over  the 
high  altar,  Mino’s  largest  work,  including  reliefs  of  the  Na- 
tivity, the  Assumption,  and  other  subjects.  Vasari  writes  that 
while  in  Rome  Mino  aided  in  sculpturing  tombs  for  various 
cardinals ; and  portions  of  those  of  Cardinal  Forteguerri 
(S.  Maria  in  Trastevere),  Riario  (SS.  Apostoli),  Ammannati 
(S.  Agostino),  and  others,  are  now  thought  to  be  from  his  hand. 
The  list  of  sculptures  recognized  as  Mino’s  includes  a number 


MINO  DA  FIESOLE 


115 

of  others,  both  in  Italy  and  in  museums  and  collections  else- 
where ; and  many  more  are  with  greater  or  less  reason  attrib- 
uted to  him. 

462.  Bust  of  Rinaldo  della  Luna;  in  the  Museo  Nazio- 
nale  at  Florence. 

Of  marble;  dated  1461. 

The  bust  bears  the  inscription,  “ rinaldo  della  luna 
sue  etatis  anno  xxvii  opus  mini  ne  mcccclxi  ” (Ri- 
naldo della  Luna  in  the  twenty-seventh  year  of  his  age. 
The  work  of  Mino,  1461).  The  young  man  is  represented 
bareheaded,  his  curling  hair,  abundant  though  fine,  ra- 
diating with  precision  from  the  crown  of  his  head  in 
curving  lines  like  the  striations  of  a shell.  He  wears  a 
tunic  richly  embroidered  in  a floral  design,  and  over  it 
a plaited  cloak  without  sleeves  or  collar,  trimmed  about 
the  openings  for  neck  and  arms  with  fur.  His  sober, 
homely  face,  with  its  gentle  mouth  and  averted,  half- 
downcast glance,  is  of  a like  spiritual  type  to  that  of  the 
young  cleric  mentioned  above  (No.  449),  and  one  which 
we  are  glad  should  have  its  place  in  the  ancient  Florence 
of  our  fancy.  Especially  noteworthy  is  the  interest  and 
care  with  which  the  artist  has  rendered  the  many  bosses 
and  hollows  of  the  striking  head  he  was  given  to  repro- 
duce, — its  rounded  forehead,  eyes  protruding  and  set 
aslant,  large  irregular  nose  (the  tip  has  been  broken  and 
replaced),  accentuated  cheekbones,  cheeks  fallen  away, 
full  lips  hanging  forward  — yet  without  failing  to  create 
from  these  verities  a work  of  exceptional  dignity  and 
charm. 


1 1 6 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


413.6.  Bust  of  Bishop  Salutati ; from  his  tomb  in  the 
cathedral  at  Fiesole. 

Of  marble.  The  tomb  was  ordered  at  least  two  years  be^ 

fore  the  Bishop’s  death,  in  1466. 

It  may  well  be  imagined  that  Bishop  Salutati  himself 
had  something  to  say  as  to  the  design  of  a tomb  begun 
during  his  lifetime.  Such  a supposition  might  explain 
its  novel  form,  — that  of  a sarcophagus  resting  in  heavy 
trestles  upon  two  consoles,  and  inclosing,  with  these  and 
pilasters  below,  a field  of  porphyry  panelling,  about  a 
bust  of  the  Bishop.  Furthermore,  the  panelling,  at  first 
sight  over-complex,  proves  to  outline  a cross,  bearing 
the  head  of  the  Bishop  in  the  position  of  the  head  of 
Christ  on  a crucifix,  a motive  whose  choice  suggests  the 
prelate  rather  than  the  artist.  The  outcome  at  Mino’s 
hands  of  a departure  from  Florentine  tradition  in  this 
tomb  was  most  fortunate  ; the  monument  is  universally 
praised  as  well  for  the  grace  of  its  plan  as  for  the  rich- 
ness and  taste  of  its  decoration.  The  bust  rests  on  a 
bracket  ornamented  with  a shield  bearing  heraldic  de- 
vices. Above  it  the  head  of  the  cross  is  outlined  by  an 
arched  moulding  containing  a shell.  The  Bishop  appears 
in  the  robes  of  his  office,  with  a richly  embroidered 
mantle  over  an  inner  tunic  of  the  delicate  texture  Mino 
knew  so  well  how  to  represent,  and  with  a mitre  splen- 
didly adorned  as  if  by  precious  metals  and  stones.  His 
strongly  marked  but  not  markedly  forceful  face  is  pre- 
sented with  a verisimilitude  that  leaves  us  in  no  doubt 
as  to  the  manner  of  man  whom  Mino  thus  immortalized. 


BENEDETTO  DA  MAIANO 


II 7 

424.  Bust  of  John  the  Baptist  as  a Boy ; in  the  Louvre. 

Of  marble.  L.  Courajod  in  the  “ Gazette  des  Beaux  Arts,” 
March,  1881,  p.  195. 

The  sketchy  imaginativeness  of  this  bust,  compared 
with  the  ingenuous  fidelity  of  those  just  mentioned, 
shows  that  Mino  when  left  to  himself  had  a very  differ- 
ent conception  of  the  sculptor’s  task  from  that  of  the 
close  observation  and  following  of  nature.  Apart  from 
the  symbolic  mantle  of  goat’s  hair,  the  work  is  an  ideal 
of  certain  of  the  graces  of  childhood  dear  to  Mino  as  to 
his  master  Desiderio,  — its  tender  rounded  forms,  its 
timidity,  its  appealing  innocence.  A similar  bust,  also 
attributed  to  Mino,  is  preserved  in  the  private  collection 
Della  Bordella  at  Florence. 


Benedetto  da  Maiano  : born  1442  in  Florence,  whither 
his  father  had  removed  from  Maiano,  on  the  slopes  of  Fie- 
sole ; died  there  May  24,  1497.  Benedetto’s  name  will  al- 
ways recall  those  of  two  rich  merchants  of  Florence,  Filippo 
Strozzi  and  Pietro  Mellini,  of  whom  the  two  existing  busts 
from  his  hand  are  faithful  portraits,  and  to  whose  enlightened 
liberality  he  owed  the  commissions  for  the  Strozzi  Palace 
and  the  pulpit  in  S.  Croce,  two  artistic  monuments  each 
well-nigh  foremost  of  its  kind  in  Italy.  The  date  on  the  bust 
of  Mellini,  “ano  1474,”  places  it  among  the  earliest  of  Bene- 
detto’s sculptures,  and  the  pulpit  is  thought  to  have  been 
executed  not  much  later,  although  the  admirable  design  and 
skilful  perspective  of  its  reliefs,  the  faultless  execution  of 
its  statuettes,  and  the  richness  and  refinement  of  its  ornament 


1 18  ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 

give  evidence  of  fully  matured  powers.  The  palace  was  be- 
gun from  Benedetto’s  designs  in  1489  ; and  two  years  later 
Filippo  Strozzi’s  will  mentions  his  tomb,  already  commenced 
in  S.  M.  Novella,  with  the  bust,  now  preserved  in  the  Louvre. 
Benedetto  had  begun  his  career  as  a wood-carver  and  in- 
layer, in  association  with  his  brother  Giuliano,  seven  years 
his  senior,  who  had  executed  among  other  works  the  doors 
of  the  cabinets  (1463)  in  the  cathedral  sacristy.  In  becom- 
ing, the  one  architect,  the  other  sculptor,  the  two  brothers 
had  not  parted  company.  In  the  cathedral  of  Faenza,  upon 
which  Giuliano  was  engaged  from  1474,  the  altar  of  St.  Sa- 
vinus  is  from  Benedetto’s  hand,  and  contains  six  of  the 
smaller  reliefs  which,  still  further  reduced  in  size,  became  a 
characteristic  feature  of  Benedetto’s  designs,  and  in  which 
he  was  without  a rival  among  his  contemporaries.  Both 
brothers  were  again  engaged  upon  the  interior  decoration  of 
the  Palazzo  Vecchio  in  Florence,  to  which  Benedetto  con- 
tributed the  sculptured  ornament  of  the  door  leading  from 
the  Salade’  Gigli  into  the  Sala  d’  Udienza,  originally  crowned 
on  either  side  with  the  cherubs  holding  garlands,  now  pre- 
served in  the  Museo  Nazionale,  and  in  the  centre  by  the 
graceful  statue  of  S.  John  as  a youth,  in  the  same  gallery.  For 
the  sacristy  of  the  cathedral  at  Loreto,  upon  whose  construc- 
tion Giuliano  was  employed  from  1481  to  i486,  Benedetto  exe- 
cuted a Lavabo  with  figures  of  angels,  still  charming  in  spite 
of  mutilation.  In  1480  the  two,  with  a third  brother,  Giovanni, 
built  near  Prato,  on  a farm  bought  a few  years  before,  a 
shrine  called  afterward  “ dell’  Ulivo,”  and  adorned  it  with  a 
seated  group  of  the  Madonna  and  Child  in  unglazed  terra- 
cotta, full  of  simple  dignity,  and  a Pieta  in  marble,  both  now 
preserved  in  Prato  cathedral.  Giuliano’s  relations  with  the 


BENEDETTO  DA  MAI  A NO  1 19 

Neapolitan  court  later  drew  Benedetto  to  Naples,  where  in 
1489,  the  year  before  Giuliano  died,  he  completed  a reredos 
of  the  Annunciation  for  the  Mastrogiudice  chapel  in  the 
church  of  Monte  Oliveto,  in  plan  like  Rossellino’s  altar  in 
the  same  church,  but  individual  in  the  striking  architectural 
perspective  of  the  central  panel,  and  in  the  cameo-like  re- 
finement of  execution  of  the  seven  predella  reliefs.  The  little 
hill  town  of  S.  Gimignano  south  of  Florence  contains  two 
of  Benedetto’s  chief  works,  the  earlier  and  more  delicately 
modelled  altar  of  S.  Fina  in  the  chapel  of  that  saint,  proba- 
bly built  by  him  after  Giuliano’s  designs  in  the  church  called 
the  Collegiata  (enlarged  1466  by  Giuliano),  and  the  tomb 
of  S.  Bartolo  (1494)  in  S.  Agostino,  both  with  old  gilding  and 
coloring.  At  Siena  the  church  of  S.  Domenico  contains  a 
ciborium  with  kneeling  angels,  in  its  upper  portion  recalling 
Quercia’s  font  in  the  Baptistery,  but  finished  below  with  the 
small  reliefs  and  rich  ornament  characteristic  of  Benedetto. 
At  his  death  in  1497  he  willed  all  his  property,  reserving  life 
interests  for  his  relatives,  to  the  Company  of  the  Bigallo, 
among  the  contents  of  his  studio  being  an  unfinished  statue 
of  S.  Sebastian  and  a group  of  the  Madonna  and  Child  (both 
now  preserved  in  the  Oratory  of  the  Misericordia  in  Flor- 
ence), whose  breadth  of  style  is  in  noticeable  contrast  with 
the  minute  elaboration  of  Benedetto’s  more  familiar  works, 
and  which  by  their  resemblances  to  Michel  Angelo’s  Sleep- 
ing Captive  (in  the  Louvre)  and  his  Madonna  of  Bruges 
form  a link  between  the  art  of  the  fifteenth  and  that  of  the 
sixteenth  century. 


20 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


463.  Bust  of  Pietro  Mellini ; in  the  Museo  Nazionale  at 
Florence. 

Of  marble.  The  bust  bears  the  inscription,  “ benedictus 

MAIANUS  FECIT.  PETRI  MELLINI  FRANCISCI  FILII  IMAGO 

hec.  ano  1474.”  (This  is  the  image  of  Pietro  Mellini,  son 
of  Francesco,  made  by  Benedetto  da  Maiano  in  the  year 
I474-) 

The  Florentine  sculptors  of  the  fifteenth  century  took 
very  seriously  their  commissions  for  portrait  busts. 
Benedetto  especially,  with  his  supreme  care  for  detail, 
has  not  spared  Mellini  a single  wrinkle,  nor  even  the 
want  of  balance  in  the  two  large  ears.  Close-cropped 
hair  lends  emphasis  to  the  rugosities  of  the  homely 
visage,  and  stalwart  shoulders  beneath  the  embroidered 
mantle  complete  the  impression  of  a man  of  the  people, 
part  of  the  vigorous  citizenry  that  won  for  Florence 
wealth  and  power.  The  bust  was  acquired  by  the  Uffizzi 
Gallery  in  1825  from  a tradesman  in  Florence. 

412.3.  Bust  of  Filippo  Strozzi  ; in  the  Louvre. 

Of  marble.  Executed  about  1491-93.  The  bust  bears  the 
inscription,  “ philippus  stroza  mathei  filius  benedic- 
tus de  maiano  fecit.”  (Filippo  Strozzi,  son  of  Matteo, 
by  Benedetto  da  Maiano.) 

This  bust,  originally  designed  for  Filippo  Strozzi’s 
tomb  in  S.  M.  Novella  in  Florence,  and  preserved  for 
centuries  in  the  Strozzi  Palace  as  a family  possession, 
was  in  1878  bought  by  the  Louvre.  A bust  in  terra- 
cotta of  the  same  subject,  bought  from  the  Strozzi  Palace 
in  1877  by  the  Berlin  Museum,  is  thought  to  have  been 


MATTEO  CIVITALI 


1 21 


the  model  for  the  marble.  The  costume  is  the  same  as 
in  Mino’s  bust  of  Rinaldo  della  Luna, — an  embroidered 
coat  under  a sleeveless  and  collarless  mantle  trimmed 
with  fur  and  hanging  upon  the  breast  in  regular  folds. 
The  physical  type,  both  simply  and  forcibly  indicated,  is 
that  of  a man  well  endowed  for  the  courtly  life  in  which 
Filippo  Strozzi  found  his  fortune. 


Matteo  Civitali:  born  in  Lucca,  July  20,  1435  (June  5? 
1436?);  died  October  12,  1501.  Vasari’s  only  reference  to 
Civitali  places  him  among  the  scholars  of  Jacopo  della 
Quercia ; and  while  the  record  of  Quercia’s  death,  October 
20,  1438,  preserved  in  the  archives  of  Siena  cathedral,  nega- 
tives this  supposition,  there  are  characteristics  in  Civitali’s 
style  which  go  far  to  explain  such  a tradition.  The  full-length 
figures  in  the  round  which  form  so  important  a part  of  Civi- 
tali’s work  never  attain  the  grandiose  quality  of  Quercia’s 
personages,  but  they  too  are  built  on  a large  model,  there  is 
a like  originality  and  vigor  in  their  pose  and  their  facial  ex- 
pression, and  a similar  richness  and  even  superabundance  in 
their  drapery.  Quercia  is  represented  by  two  masterpieces  at 
Lucca,  the  tomb  of  Ilaria  del  Carretto  and  the  reredos  at 
S.  Frediano,  and  these  works  may  well  have  influenced  Civi- 
tali, although  the  years  of  his  pupilage  in  art  were  doubtless 
passed  among  the  Florentines.  The  tomb  of  Pietro  Noceto 
(1472)  in  the  right  transept  of  Lucca  cathedral,  Civitali’s 
first  important  work,  closely  follows  the  scheme  of  Bernardo 
Rossellino’s  tomb  of  Leonardo  Bruni  at  Santa  Croce  in  Flor- 
ence (the  two  small  figures  on  the  cornice  are  probably  a 


122 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


later  addition).  It  was  Antonio  Rossellino  who  was  called 
from  Florence  to  settle  the  price  of  the  monument;  and  in 
the  most  widely  known  of  Civitali’s  works,  the  relief  of  Faith, 
now  in  the  Museo  Nazionale  at  Florence,  and  the  two  kneel- 
ing angels  (1473-76)  from  an  altar  of  the  Sacrament  (since 
destroyed)  in  the  cathedral  at  Lucca,  a spiritual  elevation  like 
that  of  Antonio’s  art  finds  still  more  consummate  expression. 
Apart  from  one  large  commission  executed  at  Genoa  in  his 
later  years,  the  statues  and  reliefs  in  the  chapel  of  S.  Giovanni 
in  the  cathedral,  Civitali’s  activity  was  confined  almost  ex- 
clusively to  his  native  city.  There  he  early  found  a patron, 
the  apostolic  secretary,  Domenico  Bertini,  whose  own  tomb  in 
the  cathedral,  executed  in  1479  during  his  lifetime,  is  but 
one,  and  the  most  modest,  among  a number  of  works  of 
sculpture  with  which  at  his  command  Civitali  adorned  the 
churches  of  Lucca.  In  the  cathedral,  beside  this  tomb  and 
the  altar  of  the  Sacrament  just  mentioned,  Civitali  executed 
on  Bertini’s  order,  between  1482  and  1484,  the  octagonal 
Tempietto  for  the  much  revered  crucifix  called  the  Volto 
Santo,  with  a statue  of  S.  Sebastian,  still  standing  between 
two  pillars  on  the  left  side  of  the  nave.  The  device  of  Bertini, 
the  words  “Ut  vivam  vera  vita”  (That  I may  live  the  true 
life),  reappears  upon  the  statue  of  the  Virgin  on  an  external 
angle  of  the  church  of  S.  Michele  (1479),  as  well  as  upon  the 
tomb  of  S.  Romano  (1490)  in  the  church  of  that  name,  and 
proves  these  works  due  to  the  same  liberal  donor.  Civitali 
had  long  been  an  important  figure  in  his  native  city.  About 
1477  he  and  his  brother  had  petitioned  the  city  for  facilities 
to  print  books  from  movable  types,  a volume  of  Petrarch’s 
Trionfi,  subsequently  issued  by  the  latter,  being  one  of  the 
earliest  fruits  of  the  new  invention  in  Italy.  The  elaborate 


MATTEO  CIVITALI 


123 


altar  of  St.  Regulus  in  the  right  transept  of  the  cathedral,  the 
sculptor’s  most  considerable  work,  is  dated  1484.  He  had 
before  (1478)  executed  a parapet  (since  displaced)  for  the 
choir,  and  later  sculptured  the  present  pulpit  (1484)  and  holy 
water  basins  (1498).  In  1490  he  constructed  for  the  Republic 
of  Lucca  a bridge  (since  destroyed)  across  the  Serchio,  a few 
miles  above  the  town.  In  1495  he  was  proposed  as  the  sculp- 
tor of  an  equestrian  statue  of  Charles  VIII,  projected  as  a 
memorial  of  the  entry  of  the  French  into  Italy.  The  statues 
and  reliefs  at  Genoa  occupied  him  for  several  years  after 
1491  or  1492;  and  while  the  reliefs,  like  those  on  the  altar 
of  St.  Regulus,  show  Civitali  at  his  weakest,  the  six  statues,  of 
Adam,  Eve,  Isaiah,  Zechariah,  Habakkuk,  and  the  mother  of 
the  Baptist  (a  singular  selection),  prove  him  at  his  best  one 
of  the  most  powerfully  impressive  sculptors  of  his  time.  His 
five  Madonnas,  those  of  the  Noceto  tomb,  the  church  of 
S.  Michele  and  the  altar  of  St.  Regulus,  the  Madonna  at 
S.  Trinita,  called  “delle  Tosse  ” (1480),  and  that  of  the  relief 
of  the  Annunciation  in  the  museum  at  Lucca,  do  not  rival 
those  of  his  Florentine  contemporaries  ; but  several  represen- 
tations of  Christ  ascribed  to  him,  one  on  the  tomb  of  S.  Ro- 
mano, two  busts  at  the  museums  of  Florence  and  Lucca,  and 
two  half-length  figures  in  churches  near  Lucca,  at  Lammari 
(1481)  and  Segromigno  (1482),  are  noteworthy  in  their  union 
of  two  main  aspects  of  his  art,  — its  religious  quality  and  its 
use  of  emphatic  and  expressive  modelling. 

479.  Relief  of  an  Allegorical  Figure  of  Faith ; in  the 

Museo  Nazionale  at  Florence. 

Of  marble. 

It  has  been  surmised  that  this  relief,  of  whose  pro- 


24 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


venience  nothing  is  known  save  that  it  was  acquired  by 
the  Uffizzi  Gallery  in  1830  from  the  prior  of  a church  at 
Paterno  near  Florence,  may  be  one  panel  of  the  relief 
with  three  figures  mentioned  by  Vasari  as  existing  at  the 
time  in  the  church  of  S.  Michele  in  Lucca,  but  which  is 
no  longer  to  be  found  there.  Taking  its  design  and  its 
subject  together,  the  evidence  is  strong  that  the  work  is 
in  fact  the  first  segment  of  a triple  relief.  For  the  bench 
on  which  the  figure  is  seated  is  terminated  on  the  left, 
but  demands  to  be  continued  on  the  right,  and  the  niche 
and  figure  are  not  in  the  centre  of  the  stone,  but  to  the 
right  of  it,  as  if  forming  a unity  with  others  beyond ; 
while  likewise  the  virtue  personified  is  commonly  named 
with  others,  and  these  two  in  number,  Hope  and  Charity. 
The  three  theological  virtues  were  also  the  subject  of  the 
triple  relief  forming  the  base  of  Donatello’s  tomb  of  Pope 
John  XXIII  in  the  Baptistery  at  Florence  (1427)  which 
Civitali  is  thought  to  have  had  in  mind  in  composing  his 
altar  of  St.  Regulus ; and  it  is  not  impossible  that  the 
lost  relief  of  S.  Michele  may  have  been  another  reminis- 
cence of  the  same  monument.  The  rough-hewn  back- 
ground of  the  present  panel  even  suggests  how  the  work 
came  to  leave  S.  Michele;  for  if  unfinished,  it  may  have 
been  only  provisionally  set  up  there.  The  relief,  which 
is  signed  O M C L (Opus  Mathei  Civitali  Lucensis), 
represents  a girlish,  almost  childish,  figure  seated  before 
a shallow  niche  upon  a bench  with  griffin’s  feet,  and  turn- 
ing, with  hands  and  glance  uplifted,  toward  a chalice,  con- 
taining the  elements  of  the  Eucharist,  which  rests  upon 


FIFTEENTH  CENTURY 


125 


a cherub’s  head  carved  over  the  edge  of  the  niche,  as  if 
floating  in  the  air  before  it.  An  infantile  suggestion  in 
the  nai've,  half-awkward  fall  of  short  folds  of  drapery 
from  her  undeveloped  shoulders  is  borne  out  as  well  by 
the  carelessly  simple  arrangement  of  her  hair,  falling  mod- 
estly over  the  temples  and  twisted  and  pulled  through  in  a 
loose  knot  behind,  as  by  the  sweet  immaturity  of  her  fea- 
tures. The  light  mantle  is  continued  below  in  voluminous 
folds,  which  conceal  the  lower  limbs  and  serve  to  centre 
the  expressive  interest  of  the  figure  in  the  head  and  arms 
uplifted  in  adoration.  Through  their  truth  to  childhood, 
these  tell  as  eloquently  of  unquestioning  faith  as  the  rapt 
gaze  of  Civitali’s  kneeling  angels  tells  of  beatific  vision. 


In  the  Style  of  the  Fifteenth  Century. 

124.  Relief  of  the  Madonna  and  Child. 

This  cast  came  into  the  possession  of  the  Museum  in 
1876  and  was  then  attributed  to  Mino  da  Fiesole.  A 
stucco  relief,  with  traces  of  old  painting,  closely  similar  to 
the  present,  is  preserved  in  the  Berlin  Museum  (No.  70. 
Bode  and  Tschudi,  “ Beschreibung  der  Bildwerke  der 
Christlichen  Epoche  ”).  It  was  obtained  in  Florence  in 
1885,  and  is  described  as  one  of  a number  of  replicas  of 
an  unknown  original  referred  to  Antonio  Rossellino.  The 
low  relief  and  fineness  of  line  suggest  Donatello’s  influ- 
ence, and  are  exemplified  in  his  “ Christ  mourned  by 
Cherubs  ” of  which  the  cast  is  described  above.  The 
Madonna  on  the  exterior  of  the  Panciatichi  Palace  in 


26 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


Florence,  formerly  attributed  to  Donatello  but  now  to 
Desiderio  da  Settignano,  exhibits  the  same  manner ; and 
the  medallion  with  the  Madonna  and  Child  on  the  Mar- 
suppini  tomb  in  S.  Croce,  by  this  sculptor,  has  likewise 
features  in  common  with  the  present  cast. 

58.  Relief  of  the  Madonna  and  Child ; in  the  possession 
of  the  Czar  of  Russia. 

Of  marble. 

This  work  is  similar  in  general  character  to  that  just 
mentioned,  and  is  also  represented  in  the  Berlin  Museum 
by  a painted  relief  in  stucco  (No.  69)  which  was  obtained 
in  Florence  in  1828.  The  catalogue  of  the  Museum  de- 
scribes this  as  one  of  many  replicas  of  a marble  original 
in  the  Victoria  and  Albert  Museum  belonging  to  Ros- 
sellino’s  earlier  years,  but  it  differs  from  that  work,  at- 
tributed at  South  Kensington  to  the  school  of  Donatello 
without  further  specification,  by  considerable  variations 
throughout  the  composition  in  the  direction  of  gentler 
and  more  flowing  modelling,  and  would  appear  to  be  a 
replica  of  the  present  relief. 

465.  Bust  of  John  the  Baptist  as  a Boy  ; in  the  Museo 
Nazionale  at  Florence. 

Of  marble. 

The  bust  bears  the  inscription,  “ego  vox  claman- 
tis  in  de$to  ” (“I  am  the  voice  of  one  crying  in  the 
wilderness  ”).  In  refinement  of  finish,  in  the  somewhat 
rigid  modelling,  and  in  the  cool  dignity  of  its  expression, 


FIFTEENTH  CENTURY 


2 7 


this  work  also  suggests  the  authorship  or  influence  of 
Antonio  Rossellino.  Several  representations  of  the  same 
subject  are  ascribed  to  him,  and  the  present,  if  not  the 
equal  of  the  figure  at  the  Museo  Nazionale,  or  the  busts 
at  the  church  of  the  Vanchettoni  in  Florence,  and  at 
the  Pinacoteca  at  Faenza,  sufficiently  resembles  these 
masterpieces  to  be  the  work  of  a pupil. 

405.  Bust  of  an  Unknown  Woman,  veiled ; in  the 
Museo  Nazionale  at  Florence. 

Of  bronze;  date  unknown.  V.  Rossi,  “II  Museo  Nazio- 
nale di  Firenze,”  Arch.  Storico  dell’  Arte,  VI,  1893,  p.  15. 

The  closed  eyes  and  naturalistic  irregularities  of  the 
features  indicate  that  this  bust  may  have  been  sculptured 
from  a death-mask.  According  to  Vasari  it  was  common 
during  the  fifteenth  century  in  Florence  “to  take  casts 
from  the  heads  of  those  who  died ; so  that  one  can  see 
in  every  house  in  Florence,  upon  mantels,  doors,  win- 
dows and  cornices,  innumerable  such  portraits,  so  well 
done  and  natural  that  they  seem  alive.”  As  a portrait 
of  Annalena  Malatesta,  the  bust  was  formerly  attrib- 
uted to  the  Sienese  artist  Lorenzo  di  Pietro,  whose 
sobriquet  of  Vecchietta  was  given  him,  it  is  said,  on 
account  of  the  many  portraits  of  elderly  persons  he 
executed  ; and  later  it  was  identified  with  Donatello’s 
portrait  of  the  Contessina  de’  Bardi,  wife  of  Cosimo  the 
Elder.  The  quiet  face,  with  its  gleam  of  a smile  and  the 
soberly  falling  veil,  close  bands,  and  simple  tunic  with- 
out collar,  have  been  interpreted  by  some  critics  as  the 
features  and  dress  of  a nun. 


128 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


59.  Bust  of  a Monk  (called  Savonarola)  ; in  the  Victoria 
and  Albert  Museum,  South  Kensington,  London. 

Of  terra-cotta. 

This  bust  is  thought  to  be  of  Florentine  origin,  and 
has  been  called  a portrait  of  Savonarola,  to  whose  au- 
thenticated likenesses  it  bears  some  resemblance.  But 
the  face  gives  token  of  a gentler  spirit,  and  one  of  less 
intellectual  range  than  could  have  dominated  in  Florence 
as  Savonarola  did. 

412.4,  400.  Two  Busts  of  Women;  at  the  Berlin  Mu- 
seum (formerly  called  Marietta  Strozzi)  and  at  the 
Louvre. 

Of  marble;  ascribed  to  the  latter  part  of  the  fifteenth 
century.  L.  Courajod,  “ Observations  sur  deux  bustes  du 
Louvre,”  Gazette  des  Beaux  Arts,  XXVIII,  1883,  p.  24; 
W.  Bode,  “Florentiner  Bildhauer,”  1902,  p.  204  f. ; G.  Ca- 
rotti,  “ Opere  di  maestri  Italiani  nel  Museo  di  Chambery,” 
Arch.  Storico  dell’  Arte,  IV,  1891,  p.  37 ; A.  Michel, 
E.  Muntz,  and  E.  Molinier  in  “ Les  Arts,”  No.  4,  pp.  37  ff. 

No  external  evidence  exists  bearing  upon  the  author- 
ship of  either  of  these  works  ; and  the  conclusions  of 
different  authorities,  based  upon  their  character,  agree 
only  in  ascribing  both  to  Italy  and  to  the  latter  part  of 
the  fifteenth  century.  The  same  style  of  dress,  of  which 
the  lines  form  a triangle  upon  the  breast,  the  same  close 
arrangement  of  the  hair,  the  same  pose,  the  same  deli- 
cate lips  and  half-shut  eyes  with  lids  slightly  aslant,  are 
found  in  the  bust  at  the  Museo  Nazionale  in  Florence, 
inscribed  with  the  name  of  Battista  Sforza ; and  a bust 


FIFTEENTH  CENTURY 


129 


in  the  Hofmuseum  at  Vienna,  another  at  Palermo,  others 
in  the  Andre  and  Dreyfus  collections  in  Paris,  the  latter 
inscribed  with  the  name  of  Beatrice  of  Arragon,  and 
still  another  in  the  Bardini  collection  at  Florence,  pos- 
sess many  of  the  same  distinctive  characters.  In  the 
Collection  Garriod  of  the  Museum  at  Chambery,  in 
France,  there  is  preserved  a marble  mask  of  a woman, 
showing  also  a portion  of  the  neck,  which  bears  a strik- 
ing resemblance  to  the  bust  of  the  Ambras  collection. 
The  Berlin  Museum  contains  another  similar  mask,  and 
still  others  exist  in  several  provincial  museums  in  France. 
The  similarities  between  these  masks  and  busts,  the 
former  perhaps  intended  for  effigies  in  other  material, 
have  been  thought  by  some  authorities  to  prove  them 
the  product,  if  not  of  the  same  artistic  personality,  at 
least  of  one  artistic  influence ; and  the  source  of  this 
influence  has  been  sought  in  the  Dalmatian  artist,  Fran- 
cesco Laurana,  the  sculptor  of  a statue  of  the  Madonna 
in  the  cathedral  at  Palermo  (1469),  and  of  another  over 
the  portal  of  S.  Barbara  at  Naples  (1474),  as  well  as  of 
other  works.  Another  view  not  only  doubts  this  attri- 
bution, but  bases  the  likenesses  between  the  works  in 
question  on  an  identity  of  method  rather  than  of  author- 
ship, interpreting  them  as  copies  from  death-masks, 
which  in  their  uniform  pose,  half-closed  lids,  and  accen- 
tuated features  preserve  some  trace  of  the  rigidity  of 
their  models.  A later  opinion  refers  them  to  an  un- 
known “ Master  of  busts  and  masks  of  women.”  Of  the 
present  two  busts,  the  former  was  until  1877  preserved 


30 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


in  the  Strozzi  Palace  in  Florence  under  the  name  of 
Marietta  Strozzi,  and  was  ascribed  to  Desiderio  da  Set- 
tignano.  Already  in  1 8 1 8 the  latter  formed  part  of  the 
collection  belonging  to  the  French  government  at  Ver- 
sailles, and  in  an  inventory  of  that  date  is  referred  to 
the  age  of  St.  Louis  (1215-70).  Of  the  former  Mr.  Per- 
kins wrote,  “ It  would  be  difficult  to  point  out  a bust 
which  more  thoroughly  combines  those  peculiar  fea- 
tures of  the  best  quattrocento  work,  high  technical  ex- 
cellence, refinement  of  taste,  delicacy  of  treatment,  and 
purity  of  design.”  The  latter  has  been  spoken  of  as 
“ very  far  from,  and  perhaps  better  than,  any  type  of 
regular  beauty ; an  image  of  grace,  modesty,  and  viva- 
cious intelligence  which  is  unquestionably  the  faithful 
reproduction  of  its  original.” 

400.3.  Recumbent  Effigy  of  Guidarello  Guidarelli ; in 
the  Accademia  delle  Belle  Arti  at  Ravenna. 

Of  marble.  The  front  of  the  draped  couch  is  not  repro- 
duced in  the  cast.  Originally  in  the  chapel  of  S.  Liberio, 
in  the  church  of  S.  Francesco  at  Ravenna,  designated  in 
Guidarello’s  will,  dated  March  6, 1 501,  as  his  place  of  burial. 
Corrado  Ricci,  “ La  Statua  di  Guidarello,”  Ravenna,  1897. 

The  face  of  this  dead  warrior  is  the  vivid  image  both 
of  a character  and  a fate.  The  members,  honorably 
arrayed  and  decently  disposed  for  their  long  sleep,  are 
those  of  any  man-at-arms  ; but  the  features  are  those  of 
a gallant  knight,  beautiful  in  body  as  well  as  lofty  in 
spirit,  overtaken,  in  the  flower  of  his  years,  by  violent 
death.  In  a time  and  a land  where  the  enemy  might 


FIFTEENTH  CENTURY  ‘ 131 

speedily  have  avenged  too  open  a lament  over  the  pathos 
of  his  deed,  these  fallen  cheeks  and  bloodless  lips  and 
darkening  eyes  could  tender  their  mute  witness  without 
challenge.  The  sculptor,  in  centring  the  artistic  inter- 
est of  his  work  in  the  noble  and  dolorous  visage,  seems 
to  have  aimed  to  reveal,  as  far  as  his  chisel  could,  the 
personality  of  the  subject  and  the  manner  of  his  end  ; 
and  the  inquiry  into  these  becomes  therefore  of  unusual 
interest.  Of  a family  originally  Florentine,  but  promi- 
nent for  a century  in  Ravenna,  Guidarello  wore  the  col- 
lana  of  nobility,  seen  about  the  neck  of  the  effigy,  by 
special  favor  of  Emperor  Frederick  III,  and  is  described 
by  the  chroniclers  of  the  time  as  distinguished  alike  in 
letters  and  in  war.  He  had  an  important  share  in  the 
enterprise  of  Caesar  Borgia  against  Faenza,  and  in  March 
of  1501  found  himself  at  Imola,  where,  in  the  intervals 
of  military  councils,  Caesar  and  his  condottieri  amused 
themselves  with  balls  and  parties  of  pleasure.  Whether 
through  a rivalry  of  love  or  of  ambition,  or  through 
whatever  other  cause  of  enmity,  he  was  there  mortally 
wounded,  “ in  secret  ” and  “ by  the  hand  of  a savage 
Roman,”  as  a poet  of  Ravenna  dared  to  write  the  fol- 
lowing year ; and  there  a few  days  later  he  died.  By  his 
will  he  left  the  servant  who  had  been  wounded  with  him 
money  for  his  transportation  to  Florence  and  cure  there. 
His  wife,  Benedetta  Dal  Sale,  was  directed  to  bury  him 
with  his  ancestors  in  the  chapel  of  S.  Liberio  at  Ravenna, 
and  to  spend  six  hundred  ducats,  or  more  at  her  discre- 
tion, in  the  ornamentation  of  the  tomb  and  the  chapel. 


132 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


At  that  time  the  chief  sculptors  of  Venice,  then  sover- 
eign over  Ravenna,  were  Pietro  Solari,  called  Lombardo 
(d.  1515),  and  his  sons  Antonio  (d.  1516)  and  Tullio 
(d.  1532)  ; and  Pietro  had  already  (1480)  executed  in 
Ravenna  at  the  same  church  of  S.  Francesco  the  tomb 
of  Dante  (since  remodelled).  The  commission  in  Bene- 
detta’s  gift  would  thus  naturally  have  fallen  to  the 
younger  Lombardi,  and  by  two  chroniclers  of  Ravenna 
the  tomb  of  Guidarello  is  so  assigned,  by  one  of  them 
expressly  to  Tullio.  In  several  figures  on  the  tomb  of 
the  Doge  Vendramin  at  Venice,  ascribed  to  the  two 
brothers,  the  heads  have  called  forth  especial  praise  ; 
and  that  of  Guidarello  possesses  a dignity  particularly 
characteristic  of  Tullio.  Another  of  Pietro’s  pupils,  one 
Severo  di  Ravenna,  has  of  late  been  mentioned  as  the 
possible  author  of  the  effigy ; but  the  style  of  his  only 
signed  work  has  been  likened  both  to  that  of  Pietro  and 
that  of  Tullio,  and  would  not  warrant  a positive  claim  in 
his  favor.  Compared  with  the  Tuscan  author  of  the  figure 
of  Ilaria  del  Carretto,  the  northern  artist,  whoever  he 
may  have  been,  that  executed  the  effigy  of  Guidarello 
seems  less  the  sculptor  and  more  the  carver  of  monu- 
ments, since  much  of  his  work  lacks  imaginative  inter- 
est. Yet  in  the  face  of  Guidarello  the  sorrow  of  his 
untoward  end  reflects  itself  as  truthfully  as  does  the 
happy  fortune  of  a death  before  the  flying  foe  in  another 
North  Italian  work,  the  effigy  of  Gaston  de  Foix  at 
Milan,  “though  dead,  all  joyful  in  countenance,”  as 
Vasari  writes,  “ over  the  victory  won.” 


FIFTEENTH  CENTURY 


133 


124.M.  Bust  of  a Young  Woman;  in  the  Galerie  Wicar 
of  the  Palais  des  Beaux  Arts  at  Lille,  France. 

Of  wax,  painted ; the  drapery  and  pedestal  of  painted  terra- 
cotta. L.  Gonse,  “ Le  Musee  Wicar,”  Gazette  des  Beaux 
Arts,  1878,  XVII,  p.  197  ; H.  Grimm,  “ Der  Liller  Mad- 
chenkopf,”  Jahrbuch  der  K.  p.  Kunstsammlungen,  IV, 
1883,  p.  104. 

This  bust,  together  with  a large  collection  of  drawings 
by  Italian  masters  and  several  other  objects  of  art,  was 
bequeathed  to  his  native  town  of  Lille  by  the  painter 
J.  B.  Wicar,  who  had  spent  almost  all  his  life  in  Italy, 
and  who  died  in  Rome  in  1834.  The  scale  is  three 
quarters  that  of  life,  and  the  subject  a young  girl  of 
about  sixteen,  with  drapery  about  her  shoulders,  and 
wearing  her  hair,  which  is  not  modelled  in  detail,  in  a 
simple  roll  around  the  back  of  the  head.  Drapery  and 
pedestal  differ  from  the  head  itself  not  only  in  material 
but  in  style,  and  were  to  all  appearance  added  in  the 
eighteenth  century,  possibly  in  preparing  the  bust  for 
sale.  Upon  its  arrival  at  Lille  several  fissures  in  the 
neck  and  breast  threatened  the  destruction  of  the  work, 
and  in  repairing  these  it  was  discovered  that  the  bust 
was  hollow,  consisting  of  a sheet  of  wax  about  a third 
of  an  inch  in  thickness,  which  had  apparently  been  run 
in  a mould  and  finished  with  a hot  iron.  The  coloring 
is  not  in  the  wax,  but  has  been  applied  with  a brush, 
the  flesh  being  a uniform  dull  amber,  the  hair  a reddish 
gold,  the  lips  carmine,  the  pupils  of  the  eyes,  which  are 
slightly  in  relief,  a sombre  sapphire.  The  head  is  a little 
turned  and  bent,  and  the  faint  contraction  of  the  eyelids 


134 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


and  tension  of  the  lips,  perhaps  also  the  forehead  mod- 
elling, with  its  hint  of  a clouded  brow,  give  the  full  face 
an  air  of  veiled  sadness.  But  all  critics  agree  that  this 
vanishes  in  the  profile,  whose  untroubled  charm  speaks 
of  an  underlying  happiness  of  nature  to  which  its  sor- 
rows are  still  strangers.  So  refined  a complexity  in  a 
work  so  unassuming  both  in  kind,  in  subject,  and  in 
manner,  has  from  the  first  lent  great  interest  to  the 
question  of  its  origin,  in  regard  to  which  no  external 
evidence  whatever  exists,  save  the  line  in  Wicar’s  inven- 
tory describing  it  as  a “ Wax  bust  of  the  time  of  Ra- 
phael.” The  single  certainty  is  the  haunting  beauty  of 
the  work  ; and  it  is  from  this  fire  that  all  the  smoke  of 
discussion  over  it  has  arisen.  It  was  early  attributed  to 
Raphael  himself,  less  on  account  of  the  soft  flow  of  line 
which  it  exhibits  in  common  with  the  two  sculptures 
ascribed  to  Raphael’s  initiative  (the  Elijah  in  S.  Maria 
del  Popolo  at  Rome  and  the  Infant  and  Dolphin  in  the 
Hermitage  Gallery)  than  for  want  of  another  more  likely 
suggestion  than  that  of  the  inventory.  The  discovery, 
in  1852,  in  an  ancient  Roman  tomb  at  Cumae,  of  the 
two  heads  in  wax  now  preserved  in  the  Naples  Museum, 
led  later  to  the  hypothesis  of  its  antique  origin,  long 
maintained  in  the  catalogue  of  the  Musee  Wicar  (1856), 
and  which  is  corroborated  by  the  arrangement  of  the 
hair  and  the  broad  flat  shape  of  the  cheeks  (as  in  the 
Venus  of  Melos).  In  1859  it  was  again  claimed  for  mod- 
ern art  as  the  work  of  the  Florentine  Orsino  Benintendi, 
who,  as  Vasari  relates,  attained,  under  Verrocchio’s  guid- 


FIFTEENTH  CENTURY 


135 


ance,  great  distinction  in  the  art  of  sculpture  in  wax  with 
the  aid  of  casts  from  the  real.  By  a later  and  much 
debated  theory  it  is  neither  wholly  ancient  nor  wholly 
modern,  being  a portrait  bust  of  the  young  girl,  the  dis- 
covery of  whose  corpse,  wonderfully  preserved  within 
heavy  layers  of  aromatic  substances,  in  an  ancient  tomb 
on  the  Via  Appia  in  1485,  so  deeply  impressed  all  classes 
in  Rome  that,  in  the  few  days  before  Pope  Innocent 
VIII  was  forced  to  order  the  body  removed  and  secretly 
reinterred,  twenty  thousand  people  flocked  to  see  the 
marvel.  A contemporary  letter  remarks  upon  the  care 
of  the  ancients,  not  only  to  immortalize  a noble  spirit, 
but  also  a body  endowed  by  nature  with  extraordinary 
beauty  ; and  if  a quasi-antique,  the  survival  of  the  Lille 
head  alone  among  similar  products  of  fifteenth-century 
art  may  be  due  not  to  chance  but  to  a modern  reverence 
for  the  portrait  that  vied  with  the  ancients  in  their  piety 
toward  the  original.  But  the  opinion  of  subsequent 
critics  has  not  been  favorable  to  this  ingenious  supposi- 
tion ; and  a modification  of  that  last  before  mentioned 
has  been  proposed,  which  refers  the  bust  to  the  influence 
of  Verrocchio’s  distinguished  pupil,  Leonardo  da  Vinci. 
The  Lille  head,  with  its  ambiguity  of  mood,  has  been 
called  the  counterpart  in  sculpture  of  Leonardo’s  por- 
trait of  Mona  Lisa  at  the  Louvre,  named  “ La  Gioconda,” 
from  the  smiling  mouth  that  belies  her  serious  and  pene- 
trating glance.  This  last  view  acknowledges  the  head  to 
be  modelled  from  the  real ; but  finds  in  the  very  elusive- 
ness of  its  emotional  expression  the  clue  to  the  author- 
ship of  the  work. 


36 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


Michel  Angelo  di  Lodovico  Buonarroti  Simoni  : born 
March  6,  1475,  at  Caprese,  in  the  upper  valley  of  the  Tiber, 
not  far  from  Arezzo  ; died  in  Rome,  February  17,  1564.  The 
art  of  Michel  Angelo  everywhere  preserves  one  fundamental 
character.  The  suggestion  of  sublimity  is  never  wholly  absent 
from  any  work  of  his,  and  has  become  a fixed  association  of 
his  name.  As  Goethe  wrote,  he  saw  the  world  with  larger 
eyes  than  we.  Nor  was  the  scale  of  his  personality  or  of  his 
fortunes  that  of  common  humankind.  The  energy,  both 
physical  and  mental,  put  forth  throughout  his  ninety  years 
was  that  of  a giant ; what  he  accomplished,  although  at  the 
limit  of  human  achievement  in  all  three  arts  of  external  form, 
was  but  the  fragmentary  execution  of  still  grander  plans  ; 
and  it  was  in  the  service,  not  of  nobles  or  of  kings,  but  of 
the  ecclesiastical  monarchs  of  Christendom,  that  all  his  ma- 
turity was  spent.  Of  his  greater  undertakings,  the  tomb  of 
Pope  Julius  II  (1505-45)  and  the  ceiling  of  the  Sistine 
Chapel  (1508-12)  were  begun,  and  the  latter  finished,  under 
that  pontiff ; the  fruitless  labor  on  the  faQade  of  S.  Lorenzo 
in  Florence  (1516-20)  and  the  designs  for  the  adjacent  Lau- 
rentian  Library  were  commanded  by  his  successor  Leo  X ; 
the  sacristy  of  the  same  church,  with  the  tombs  of  the  Medici 
princes  (1523-34),  was  the  commission  of  Clement  VII ; and 
the  Last  Judgment  on  the  altar  wall  of  the  Sistine  Chapel 
(I535-4I)  and  the  dome  of  St.  Peter’s  (1547),  those  of  Paul  III 
and  his  successors  during  Michel  Angelo’s  remaining  years. 

An  array  of  masterpieces  for  less  august  patrons  antedated 
and  won  for  Michel  Angelo  the  notice  of  the  popes.  When  in 
1490  Lorenzo  de’  Medici,  regretting  that  the  previous  brilliant 
generation  of  sculptors  had  left  no  heirs  in  Florence,  opened 
a school  of  the  art  in  his  garden  on  the  Piazza  S.  Marco,  he 


MICHEL  ANGELO 


137 


little  thought  that  the  net  so  spread  would  snare  forthwith  an 
eaglet  of  higher  flight  than  any  foregoer.  Until  Lorenzo’s 
death  in  1492  Michel  Angelo  was  an  inmate  of  his  house,  and 
the  companion  of  his  son  Giovanni,  later  Leo  X,  and  of  his 
nephew  Giulio,  later  Clement  VII.  A mask  of  a Faun  that  is 
said  to  have  gained  the  boy  this  favor  is  preserved  in  the 
Museo  Nazionale  in  Florence  ; and  the  Casa  Buonarroti,  until 
its  gift  to  the  city  in  1858  the  family  home  since  Michel 
Angelo’s  time,  contains  two  panels  from  these  earlier  years,  — 
a Madonna  in  the  low  relief  familiar  in  the  works  of  Dona- 
tello and  his  followers,  and  a Battle  of  the  Centaurs,  in  high 
relief,  for  which  the  idea  was  given  by  Politian,  and  which 
shows,  as  Michel  Angelo  himself  later  said,  what  wrong  he 
did  his  nature  in  not  devoting  himself  unremittingly  to  sculp- 
ture. The  Hercules  of  heroic  size  which  was  his  first  work 
after  the  shock  of  Lorenzo’s  death  in  1492  was  presented, 
many  years  later,  to  Francis  the  First  of  France,  and  stood  in 
the  palace  gardens  at  Fontainebleau  until  1713,  when  they 
were  remodelled  and  it  was  lost.  Upon  the  expulsion  of  his 
patrons  from  Florence  in  1494,  Michel  Angelo  fled  to  Bologna, 
where,  at  the  instance  of  Gianfrancesco  Aldovrandi,  he  added 
three  statuettes  — a kneeling  angel  and  figures  of  SS.  Pe- 
tronius  and  Proculus  — to  the  tomb  of  S.  Domenico,  just  left 
unfinished  by  Niccolo  dell’  Area.  A statue  of  John  the  Baptist 
as  a youth,  in  the  Berlin  Museum,  is  now  thought  to  be  that 
later  commissioned  in  Florence  by  Lorenzo  di  Pierfrancesco 
de’  Medici ; but  of  a sleeping  Cupid,  of  the  same  date,  all 
trace  is  now  lost.  At  Rome,  in  1497,  he  executed  for  the 
banker  Jacopo  Galli  a Cupid,  which  by  some  critics  is  identi- 
fied with  the  statue  in  the  Museum  at  South  Kensington  ; 
and  the  figure  of  Bacchus,  now  in  the  Museo  Nazionale  at 


38 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


Florence;  and  in  1498,  for  the  French  ambassador,  Jean  de 
Groslaye  de  Villiers,  the  Pieta  called  Madonna  della  Febbre, 
now  in  St.  Peter’s.  Three  years  later  he  received  from  the 
cathedral  authorities  in  Florence  an  order  for  the  colossal 
statue  of  David  now  standing  in  the  Accademia  delle  Belle 
Arti.  It  was  completed  in  1504,  in  his  thirtieth  year,  and  gave 
him  the  name  of  the  greatest  sculptor  the  world  had  ever 
seen.  While  engaged  upon  it  he  executed,  on  the  commission 
of  Pietro  Soderini,  then  the  chief  of  the  Florentine  state,  a 
life-size  David  with  the  head  of  Goliath,  in  bronze,  which  was 
afterwards  sent  as  a present  to  Florimond  Robertet,  secretary 
of  finance  to  Louis  XII  of  France,  but  of  which  nothing  is 
now  known.  The  marble  figure  of  the  Dying  Adonis,  also 
of  life  size,  now  in  the  Museo  Nazionale,  is  thought  to  date 
from  this  time.  The  circular  painting  representing  the  Holy 
Family,  preserved  in  the  Tribune  of  the  Uffizzi  Gallery,  was 
executed  for  Angelo  Doni  in  1503 ; and  before  1505,  perhaps 
at  Carrara,  the  marble  group  of  the  Madonna  and  Child,  — 
since  that  date  in  the  chapel  of  the  Sacrament  in  Notre  Dame 
at  Bruges,  — for  the  Flemish  merchants,  Jean  and  Alexandre 
Mouscron. 

These  earlier  works,  and  the  great  frescoes  in  the  Sistine 
chapel,  were  all  that  Michel  Angelo  ever  finished.  Already 
he  had  undertaken  several  commissions  destined  to  unfulfil- 
ment. Of  the  fifteen  statuettes  ordered  in  1501  for  the  Picco- 
lomini  chapel  in  Siena  cathedral  by  Cardinal  Piccolomini, 
later  Pius  III,  but  four  were  ever  executed,  apparently  in 
part  only  by  his  hand  ; of  the  twelve  statues  of  Apostles  for 
pilasters  of  Florence  cathedral,  ordered  in  1503,  but  one,  a 
St.  Matthew,  now  in  the  Accademia  at  Florence,  was  ever  even 
begun  ; neither  a commission  that  could  have  much  attracted 


MICHEL  ANGELO 


139 


him.  Unfinished  also  are  the  two  round  reliefs  of  the  Ma- 
donna executed  for  gentlemen  of  Florence,  and  now  preserved 
in  the  Museo  Nazionale  in  Florence  and  the  Royal  Academy 
in  London. 

Upon  the  completion  of  the  David,  in  the  autumn  of  1504, 
Michel  Angelo  was  called  to  prepare  a cartoon  for  one  of  the 
two  principal  walls  of  the  council  chamber  in  the  Palazzo 
Vecchio,  constructed  on  the  suggestion  of  Savonarola  for  pop- 
ular assemblies,  Leonardo  da  Vinci  receiving  the  commission 
for  the  other.  Both  cartoons,  that  of  Leonardo  depicting  the 
battle  of  Anghiari,  and  that  of  Michel  Angelo  representing 
Florentine  soldiers  surprised  by  English  cavalry  while  bathing, 
excited  intense  admiration,  but  both  have  been  lost,  and  both 
artists  soon  after  abandoned  their  tasks,  Michel  Angelo  to  fol- 
low the  call  of  Julius  II  to  Rome.  The  grandeur  of  plan  of 
the  papal  commissions  which  from  this  time  forward  occupied 
him,  and  the  jealousies  and  rivalries  they  excited,  suffice  to 
explain  their  untoward  fate.  The  colossal  bronze  statue  of 
Julius  II  over  the  door  of  S.  Petronio  at  Bologna,  which  occu- 
pied Michel  Angelo  during  1507  and  1508,  was  pulled  down 
by  the  enemies  of  the  pope  three  years  later,  and  sent  to 
Ferrara  to  be  melted  into  cannon  by  the  same  Duke  Alfonso 
for  whom  Michel  Angelo  twenty  years  afterward  painted  his 
picture,  since  lost,  of  Leda  and  the  Swan.  The  sepulchre  of 
Julius  as  finally  carried  out  in  S.  Pietro  in  Vincoli  at  Rome 
was  but  a fragment  of  the  original  undertaking,  from  which 
the  Medici  popes,  his  successors,  called  Michel  Angelo  away, 
i first  to  spend  four  years  in  designing  a fa9ade  for  S.  Lorenzo 
in  Florence,  and  in  quarrying  and  transporting  the  necessary 
marble,  and  later,  before  a stone  had  been  placed,  to  begin 
their  magnificent  mortuary  chapel  next  the  same  church,  in 


140 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


turn  abandoned,  its  sculptures  less  than  half  completed,  upon 
the  death,  in  1534,  of  Clement  VII.  To  Clement’s  ambassador 
Valori,  Michel  Angelo  had  presented  in  1529  an  Apollo  which 
is  identified  with  the  unfinished  statue  bearing  that  name  in 
the  Museo  Nazionale.  The  unfinished  group  of  Victory,  also 
in  the  Museo  Nazionale,  is  thought  to  have  formed  part  of 
the  original  design  for  the  tomb  of  Julius  II.  Only  the  dome 
of  S.  Peter’s  and  the  frescoes  of  the  Sistine  chapel  were  ulti- 
mately completed,  the  former  in  general  accordance  with  his 
model  of  wood  still  preserved  in  the  Vatican,  the  latter  by  his 
own  hand,  unaided  even  in  the  grinding  of  his  colors.  But 
the  absence  of  the  statues  upon  consoles,  which  in  the  model 
for  S.  Peter’s  form  a circle  above  the  drum,  makes  itself  felt 
in  the  present  outline  of  the  dome,  and  the  change  in  the 
ground  plan  of  the  church,  in  the  next  century,  from  a Greek 
to  a Latin  cross,  has  in  great  part  nullified  the  effect,  both 
external  and  internal,  which  its  crowning  feature  was  intended 
to  produce  ; while  the  process  of  adding  drapery  to  the  naked 
figures  in  the  Last  Judgment,  continued  for  years  by  other 
hands,  both  before  and  after  Michel  Angelo’s  death,  and  the 
gradual  darkening  of  its  surface  by  altar  smoke,  have  left  it 
almost  a ruin.  The  ceiling  of  the  chapel  remains  nearly  as  he 
completed  it ; but  even  upon  this  it  is  said  that  the  impatience 
of  Julius  denied  him  time  for  the  last  finishing  touches,  and 
thirty  years  later  the  two  lunette  pictures  which  occupied  the 
altar  wall  were  painted  out  by  Michel  Angelo  himself  to  make 
room  for  the  corresponding  parts  of  the  Last  Judgment. 

Among  undertakings  that  never  advanced  beyond  the  stage 
of  designs,  or  perhaps  even  of  fancies,  may  be  mentioned 
a colossus  which  he  conceived  of  carving  out  of  the  mountains 
overlooking  the  sea  at  Carrara,  to  be  a landmark  for  sailors ; 


MICHEL  ANGELO 


141 

a tomb  to  receive  the  remains  of  Dante,  which,  in  joining  in 
the  petition  for  their  return  from  Ravenna  in  1519,  Michel 
Angelo  declared  himself  ready  to  erect  in  Florence ; a colos- 
sal group  of  Samson  triumphing  over  the  Philistines,  commis- 
sioned in  1528  by  the  Signoryof  Florence  as  a pendant  to  the 
David  ; a fresco  of  the  Fall  of  Lucifer  planned  for  the  entrance 
wall  of  the  Sistine  chapel  as  a counterpart  to  the  Last  Judg- 
ment ; a church  of  unparalleled  magnificence  to  be  erected  in 
Rome  by  the  citizens  of  Florence,  in  honor  of  S.  Giovanni, 
of  which  both  Michel  Angelo’s  plan  and  the  model  made  from 
it  have  perished ; a chapel  in  Santa  Croce,  to  contain  his 
tomb  and  to  be  ornamented  with  pictures  and  statues,  for 
which  he  received  the  permission  of  the  clergy  of  the  church, 
but  was  denied  that  of  its  secular  guardians. 

Such  was  the  partial  way  in  which  alone  the  world  of  Michel 
Angelo’s  time,  and  he  himself,  could  make  use  of  his  transcend- 
ent powers.  Only  the  fear  of  the  displeasure  of  Paul  III  pre- 
vented him  in  1534  from  retreating  to  Urbino,  whither  he  had 
sent  to  buy  house  and  lands,  there  to  complete  the  sepulchre 
of  Julius  II  undisturbed  and  under  the  protection  of  the  Duke ; 
and  late  in  life,  after  a visit  to  the  mountain  monasteries  of  Spo- 
leto,  he  wrote  that  less  than  half  of  himself  came  back  to  Rome, 
for  “ truly  in  the  forest  only  one  finds  peace.”  Of  his  own  pro- 
ductions he  said  that  he  would  have  completed  few  or  none, 
had  he  aimed  to  content  himself.  Whatever  the  labor  spent 
upon  a task,  for  any  imperfection  of  material,  or  accident  of 
his  impetuous  workmanship,  he  would  recommence  or  abandon 
it.  The  appearance  of  a dark  vein  in  a marble  figure  of  Christ, 
ordered  in  1514  by  Roman  gentlemen  for  the  church  of 
S.  Maria  sopra  Minerva,  caused  him  to  reject  it  and  begin  the 
present  statue,  upon  whose  faulty  completion  by  other  hands 


142 


. ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


he  would  have  furnished  a third  had  his  patrons  consented  to 
surrender  the  masterpiece.  The  universality  of  his  genius, 
moreover,  involved  him  in  many  labors  which  either  gave  his 
spirit  no  adequate  outlet,  like  the  fortification  of  the  hill  of 
San  Miniato  at  Florence  against  the  Spanish  in  1527  and  the 
later  fortification  of  the  Vatican ; or,  as  in  his  poetry,  disputed 
his  powers  with  their  more  natural  channels.  Other  memorials 
of  his  devotion  to  Florentine  liberty  are  the  unfinished  bust 
of  Brutus  now  in  the  Museo  Nazionale,  begun,  it  is  thought,  in 
1 539>  honor  of  the  slayer  of  the  tyrant  Duke  Alessandro 
de’  Medici;  and  his  message  to  the  King  of  France  in  1545, 
offering  to  erect  for  him  without  cost  in  the  Piazza  della  Sig- 
noria  an  equestrian  statue  of  bronze,  if  he  would  but  give 
Florence  back  her  freedom.  His  sonnets  are  the  reflection  of 
his  friendships,  with  Vittoria  Colonna,  Marchioness  of  Pescara, 
with  the  young  Tommaso  Cavallieri  and  others,  and  of  the 
lofty  philosophic  and  religious  attitude  of  his  maturer  years. 

In  1549,  at  the  end  of  seven  years’  slow  labor  over  the  two 
frescoes  in  the  Pauline  chapel  of  the  Vatican,  the  “ Conver- 
sion of  St.  Paul  ” and  the  “ Martyrdom  of  St.  Peter,”  he  con- 
fessed that  “ painting  was  no  art  for  old  men.”  The  marble 
Pietk  which  he  intended  should  adorn  his  grave  had  been 
abandoned  because  miswrought,  and  is  preserved  unfinished 
in  the  Palazzo  Rondanini  at  Rome.  A larger  group  repre- 
senting the  same  subject,  undertaken  afterward  (1550),  was 
broken  to  fragments  in  a fury  of  disappointment  over  the 
recalcitrance  of  the  marble.  Restored  by  the  young  sculptor 
Calcagni  after  its  abandonment  by  Michel  Angelo,  it  now 
stands  behind  the  high  altar  of  Florence  cathedral.  There 
remained  architecture,  and  of  great  achievements  in  this  art 
his  last  years  were  full.  The  Campidoglio  was  remodelled 


MICHEL  ANGELO  ■ 


143 


after  his  designs,  part  of  the  baths  of  Diocletian  transformed 
into  the  present  imposing  church  of  S.  Maria  degli  Angeli, 
and  the  Farnese  Palace  completed.  At  his  death  he  was  still 
burdened  with  the  whole  responsibility  for  St.  Peter’s,  a labor 
of  profound  love  for  which  he  refused  all  pay,  and  which  he 
did  not  live  to  see  completed.  Unprecedented  funeral  honors, 
months  in  preparation,  were  paid  him  in  Florence,  and  he  was 
buried  in  S.  Croce,  where  his  faithful  friend  and  passionate 
admirer,  Vasari,  designed  the  present  tomb. 


43.  Relief  of  the  Madonna  and  Child  with  St.  John ; in 
the  Royal  Academy,  Burlington  House,  London. 

Of  marble;  executed  between  1501  and  1505. 

Vasari,  who  mentions  both  this  relief  and  the  similar 
panel  now  in  the  Museo  Nazionale  at  Florence,  assigns 
no  reason  why  either  was  left  partly  in  the  rough  ; and  in 
these  as  in  other  works  of  Michel  Angelo,  some  critics 
have  assumed  an  ideality  of  purpose  best  attained  through 
their  incompleteness.  In  the  sculpture  of  the  present 
day,  the  works  of  Rodin,  with  the  rough-hewn  masses  in 
which  their  finished  portions  are  imbedded,  are  still  more 
unequivocal  illustrations  of  the  artistic  impulse  here  im- 
puted to  Michel  Angelo.  These  two  panels,  and  espe- 
cially the  present  one,  seem  rather  to  illustrate  Michel 
Angelo’s  own  definition  of  sculpture  as  the  art  that 
“ works  by  removing,”  in  distinction  from  painting,  the 
art  that  works  by  adding.  His  conception  seems  to  be 
everywhere  dawning  upon  us  out  of  the  stone,  further 
advanced  in  the  Madonna’s  head  and  the  child’s  body 


144 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


than  in  the  figure  of  the  Baptist,  but  nowhere  as  yet  per- 
fectly visible.  Over  the  whole  surface  of  the  work  the 
marks  of  the  toothed  chisel  still  appear,  and  as  in  the 
Florentine  relief,  run  in  all  directions,  bearing  witness  to 
Michel  Angelo’s  facility  with  both  hands  in  sculpture.  In 
the  Florentine  panel,  the  book  lying  forgotten  in  the  lap 
of  the  mother,  and  into  which  the  child  plunges  his  elbow 
as  he  stands  with  crossed  feet  against  her  knee,  has  been 
interpreted  as  a volume  of  Scripture,  open  at  a prophecy 
of  Christ’s  life,  and  their  attitude  as  one  of  boding  revery 
over  the  fate  therein  foretold.  But  the  intended  motive 
may  have  been  only  a childlike  inconstancy,  for  the  Lon- 
don relief  presents  purely  a scene  of  play,  the  child  grasp- 
ing his  mother’s  arm  with  both  hands,  and  bending  in 
a long  stride  over  her  knee,  as  if  to  escape  something, 
apparently  to  be  wrought  into  the  shape  of  a bird,  held 
toward  him  by  the  little  St.  John.  The  faint  outlines  of 
the  Madonna’s  right  hand  indicate  that  it  was  to  be 
placed  on  St.  John’s  shoulder,  to  bar  his  further  approach  ; 
but  this  part  of  the  panel  is  still  almost  wholly  imprisoned 
in  the  stone.  The  atmosphere  of  restlessness  in  both  re- 
liefs is  a marked  innovation  in  representations  of  this  sub- 
ject, always  one  of  composure  if  not  repose  in  the  work 
of  earlier  sculptors,  and  which  in  less  powerful  hands 
might  have  surrendered  its  dignity  with  its  calm.  Com- 
pared with  panels  by  Donatello  or  Rossellino  (such  as 
those  reproduced  in  Nos.  1 3 1 and  478  of  the  present  collec- 
tion), they  show  also  a marked  difference  of  method  in 
relief  sculpture.  In  these  earlier  works  all  the  parts,  even 


MICHEL  ANGELO 


1 45 


those  in  highest  relief,  are  very  greatly  flattened,  while 
many  of  Michel  Angelo’s  rich  and  vigorous  forms  have 
the  undistorted  proportions  of  the  round.  In  the  Floren- 
tine panel  the  Madonna’s  head  is  of  the  massive  type  of 
the  Aurora  of  the  Medici  tombs,  or  the  Leah  of  the  Julius 
monument,  while  in  the  London  work  it  has  the  gentler 
character  of  the  Bruges  Madonna  or  the  Madonna  della 
Febbre.  The  present  relief  was  made,  according  to  Vasari, 
for  Taddeo  Taddei  of  Florence.  In  the  early  part  of  this 
century  it  was  in  the  possession  of  the  painter  Wicar,  the 
then  owner  of  the  Raphaelesque  head  in  wax  reproduced 
in  No  124.M  of  the  present  collection,  and  was  obtained 
from  him  for  the  Royal  Academy  by  Sir  George  Beau- 
mont, the  generous  lover  of  art  and  friend  of  the  poet 
Wordsworth. 

897.  Head  from  the  Colossal  Statue  of  David ; in  the 
Accademia  delle  Belle  Arti  at  Florence. 

Of  marble  ; executed,  between  September,  1501,  and  Jan- 
uary, 1504. 

By  a decree  of  the  Board  of  Works  of  Florence  ca- 
thedral, dated  August  16,  1501,  Michel  Angelo  received 
a commission  to  “make,  complete,  and  perfectly  finish 
the  so-called  giant  of  marble  nine  ells  high,  existing 
in  the  cathedral  works,  blocked  out,  and  badly  blocked 
out  heretofore  by  Master  Augustine.”  The  surname  of 
Master  Augustine  is  illegible  in  the  archives,  but  a pre- 
vious decree  of  the  board,  dated  August  18,  1464,  assigns 
to  Agostino  di  Duccio,  the  sculptor  of  the  delicate  and 


146 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


elaborate  facade  of  S.  Bernardino  at  Perugia,  the  com- 
mission for  a “gughante”  nine  ells  high,  representing 
a prophet,  to  be  blocked  out  in  the  quarry  at  Carrara, 
and  set  up  on  one  of  the  buttresses  of  Florence  cathe- 
dral. It  was  undoubtedly  this  “gughante,”  two  years 
afterward  withdrawn  unfinished  from  Agostino’s  hands, 
that  lay  in  the  cathedral  works,  mishewn,  and  with  a 
hole  bored  completely  through  it,  as  Vasari  writes,  the 
despair  not  only  of  its  own  sculptor  but  all  others,  until 
in  1501  Andrea  Sansavino  asked  leave  to  make  a statue 
from  it  by  adding  other  pieces.  Before  granting  his  re- 
quest the  Board  of  Works  sent  for  Michel  Angelo,  then 
fresh  from  his  Roman  successes,  the  Bacchus  and  the 
Madonna  della  Febbre,  and  upon  his  offer  to  carve  a 
figure  out  of  the  immense  piece  as  it  stood,  the  order 
was  given  him  and  the  work  begun.  The  special  diffi- 
culty of  his  task,  the  choice  of  a design  possible  within 
the  limits  already  sketched  in  the  marble,  was  so  tri- 
umphantly met  by  Michel  Angelo  that  if  in  a few  places, 
as  along  the  backbone,  the  necessary  relief  was  wanting, 
portions  of  the  original  surface  of  the  stone  were  still  to 
be  seen  at  the  completion  of  the  work,  upon  the  crown 
of  the  head  and  at  the  base.  When  finished  the  statue 
was  slung  in  an  ingenious  cradle  of  rope  and  four  days 
later  reached  the  Piazza  della  Signoria,  where  it  was 
set  up,  in  accordance  with  Michel  Angelo’s  preference, 
on  one  side  the  entrance  to  the  Palazzo  Vecchio,  after 
a discussion  in  which  Leonardo  and  others  advocated 
other  positions.  The  first  night  out  of  the  workshop  on 


MICHEL  ANGELO 


147 


the  way  to  the  Piazza  it  was  stoned  by  young  mischief- 
makers,  and  in  1527  the  left  arm  was  broken  by  a missile 
thrown  in  a popular  tumult ; but  it  was  not  until  1846 
that  marks  of  injury  from  the  weather  led  to  an  agita- 
tion for  its  removal,  which  resulted  in  the  building  of  the 
pavilion,  attached  to  the  Accademia  delle  Belle  Arti, 
where  the  statue  has  stood  since  1873. 

David  is  represented  as  a powerful  stripling,  wholly 
nude,  with  the  overgrown  extremities  and  articulations 
of  a boy  in  his  early  teens,  though  with  a muscular 
development  suggesting  much  maturer  years.  He  stands 
erect  and  glances  towards  the  left,  the  sling  he  has  pre- 
pared for  Goliath  thrown  over  his  back,  its  pouch  with 
the  stone  grasped  in  his  uplifted  left  hand,  and  the  end 
of  the  thongs  in  his  right,  which  hangs  loosely  at  his 
thigh,  though  already  nerving  itself  for  its  effort.  The 
knitted  brows,  the  riveted  gaze,  the  distended  nostrils, 
the  weight  thrown  on  the  right  foot,  leaving  the  left  free 
for  a stride  forward,  unite  to  express  the  moments  of 
suspense  when  “the  Philistine  came  on  and  drew  nigh 
unto  David,”  as  he  stood  waiting  his  opportunity  and 
measuring  the  distance  of  his  formidable  foe.  For  the 
moment  all  is  ease  and  balance  in  the  massive  figure  ; 
only  the  gathering  storm  in  the  face  foretells  the  light- 
ning speed  and  force  of  the  blow  impending.  The  head 
is  thought  to  bear  some  resemblance  to  that  of  Dona- 
tello’s St.  George,  of  which  the  motive  and  bearing  are 
much  the  same.  To  another  renowned  work,  the  immense 
antique  groups  in  marble  called  the  Horse  Tamers,  on 


1 48 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


Monte  Cavallo  in  Rome,  Michel  Angelo  may  have  owed 
both  the  inspiration  for  his  boyish  colossus  and  the  sug- 
gestion for  a freedom  of  pose  and  verity  and  beauty  of 
modelling,  in  which,  according  to  his  contemporaries,  he 
even  outdid  antiquity. 

885.  Group  of  the  Madonna  and  Child;  in  a niche  of 
black  marble  over  the  altar  of  the  chapel  of  the  Sacra- 
ment in  the  church  of  Notre  Dame  at  Bruges. 

Of  marble;  executed  between  1501  and  1505. 

The  conception  of  this  work  more  nearly  approaches 
the  ideal  of  lofty  serenity  which  before  Michel  Angelo’s 
time  was  invariably  associated  with  its  subject  than  any 
other  of  his  Madonnas.  The  place  and  purpose  for  which 
it  was  designed  and  which  it  has  since  filled  are  clearly 
signified  in  the  quiet  clasp  of  the  hands,  in  the  symmet- 
rical and  even  drooping  lines  of  the  Madonna’s  figure, 
and  in  the  downward  glance  of  both  the  brooding  faces. 
Yet  even  in  an  object  of  devotion  for  an  altar,  Michel 
Angelo  has  not  failed  to  suggest  a momentary  pose,  in 
the  action  of  the  Madonna  to  retain  her  book  upon  her 
lap,  in  the  right  foot  raised  upon  a jutting  rock,  and 
especially  in  the  figure  of  the  child,  whose  feet  upon  his 
mother’s  mantle  slip  from  the  verge  of  the  stone  as  he 
supports  himself  by  his  arm  thrown  over  her  knee.  The 
Madonna’s  drapery,  here  as  in  the  Pieta  the  setting  of 
a nude  figure,  is  simpler  and  less  voluminous  than  in 
that  group,  in  harmony  with  the  infantile  form  it  sur- 
rounds and  binds  into  one  with  that  of  the  mother,  and, 


MICHEL  ANGELO 


149 


as  in  Michel  Angelo’s  other  Madonnas,  is  completed  by 
a cloth  over  the  head  like  a hood.  The  child’s  head  is  of 
exaggerated  size,  as  in  the  reliefs  just  mentioned.  Critics 
have  noted  a certain  softness  of  finish  in  this  work  which 
seems  to  betray  another  hand  than  Michel  Angelo’s,  but 
the  evidence,  as  well  external  as  internal,  is  irresistible 
that  the  design  at  least  is  his  in  all  its  particulars.  The 
bodily  type  of  both  figures,  the  noble  melancholy  of  the 
Madonna’s  face,  the  style  of  her  dress  and  drapery,  are 
indubitably  the  product  of  Michel  Angelo’s  imagination. 
In  1521  Albrecht  Diirer  notes  in  his  journal  of  a trip  to 
the  Netherlands  that  he  saw  in  Bruges  “ in  Our  Lady, 
the  alabaster  image  of  Mary  that  Michel  Angelo  of 
Rome  made.”  It  is  true  that  Condivi,  the  pupil  and 
biographer  of  Michel  Angelo,  describes  the  Madonna  ex- 
ecuted for  the  Mouscron  family  of  Flanders  as  a bronze  ; 
but  he  wrote  thirty  years  after  Durer’s  journey,  and  the 
niche  Pierre  Mouscron  built  for  the  “ alabaster  image,” 
and  his  grave  at  its  feet,  witness  to  a veneration  that 
would  not  have  been  felt  for  a copy. 

404.1.  Statue  of  Moses;  from  the  tomb  of  Pope  Julius  II 
in  the  church  of  S.  Pietro  in  Vincoli  at  Rome. 

Of  marble.  In  Michel  Angelo’s  studio  for  forty  years. 

C.  Justi,  “Michel  Angelo,”  1900,  pp.  203-348.  “Die  Tra- 
• goedie  des  Grabmals.” 

“ The  tragedy  of  the  sepulchre  ” of  Julius  II.,  as  Con- 
divi calls  the  ill-starred  commission  which  was  the  first 
given  Michel  Angelo  by  any  papal  patron,  accomplished 


150 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


itself  in  five  long  acts,  covering  nearly  half  the  artist’s 
life.  The  tomb  was  ordered  in  1505,  and  not  completed 
until  after  1 542.  In  one  of  his  letters  Michel  Angelo 
himself  laments  his  lost  years  “ bound  to  this  sepulchre  ” 
as  one  of  the  captives  he  carved  for  its  base  might  be 
conceived  to  do.  At  first  designed  as  a great  rectangu- 
lar mass  to  stand  isolated  in  the  tribune  of  the  old 
church  of  St.  Peter’s,  and  to  be  ornamented  on  all  sides 
with  more  than  forty  statues  of  heroic  size,  beside 
reliefs,  it  was  robbed  of  its  main  distinction  at  the  death 
of  Julius  in  1513  by  the  decision  to  give  it  the  tradi- 
tional position  of  a mural  tomb.  Three  years  later,  in 
1516,  the  ground  area  of  the  design  was  diminished 
by  one  half,  and  the  number  of  statues  reduced  to  nine- 
teen. Sixteen  years  later,  in  1532,  the  place  in  St.  Peter’s 
was  relinquished  for  the  much  humbler  destination  of 
S.  Pietro  in  Vincoli,  the  dimensions  of  the  tomb  being  still 
further  reduced,  and  the  number  of  statues  to  be  fur- 
nished by  Michel  Angelo  being  cut  down  to  six.  Ten 
years  later,  in  1542,  upon  Michel  Angelo’s  petition,  the 
completion  of  all  of  these  except  the  Moses  was  given 
over  to  Raphael  da  Montelupo,  the  contract  freeing 
Michel  Angelo  from  all  further  responsibility  for  the 
tomb,  that  a “ perpetual  silence  may  be  imposed  upon 
this  business  of  the  sepulchre,  as  far  as  Michel  Angelo 
is  concerned.”  Two  other  statues,  those  of  the  Contem- 
plative and  the  Active  Life,  which  at  this  late  moment, 
by  a remarkable  display  of  creative  resource,  Michel 
Angelo  produced  to  replace  the  figures  of  two  captives, 


MICHEL  ANGELO 


r5x 

the  “ Slaves  ” of  the  Louvre,  withdrawn  because  dispro- 
portionate to  the  new  design,  were  in  the  end  finished 
by  his  own  hand.  A few  years  later  the  tomb  was  at 
last  erected  as  it  stands.  After  all,  Julius  II  is  not 
buried  beneath  it,  but  in  St.  Peters. 

Meanwhile  it  was  first  the  pope  himself  who  grew 
indifferent  to  the  undertaking,  then  his  successors  who 
drew  Michel  Angelo  away  from  it,  involving  him  in  a 
lawsuit  with  the  disappointed  heirs  of  Julius  ; and  later 
even  his  associates  in  the  work  who  thwarted  him  by 
their  “ ignorant  and  brutal  ” quarrels ; until  at  length 
Michel  Angelo,  wishing  only  to  be  free,  allowed  what 
would  to  befall  his  conception,  even  to  the  patching  and 
remodelling  that  make  of  the  existing  design  the  travesty 
of  its  expected  glory. 

The  present  position  of  the  statue  of  Moses  differs 
from  that  for  which  it  was  planned  in  that  it  fills  a recess 
on  a level  with  the  eye,  instead  of  standing  free  upon  a 
cornice  some  twelve  feet  from  the  ground  ; and  in  that 
it  is  central  in  the  tomb  instead  of  being  one  of  several 
figures  similarly  placed.  The  perpendicular  lines  of  the 
right-hand  side  of  the  statue  have  further  been  thought 
to  indicate  that  this  side,  and  not  the  back,  as  at  pre- 
sent, was  originally  intended  to  be  placed  against  the 
wall  of  the  tomb.  What  the  monument  would  have  been 
from  which  a group  of  such  statues  should  look  down  it 
is  difficult  to  fancy  ; and  they  were  neither  the  sole  nor 
the  main  adornment  of  the  great  pyramid  of  sculpture 
that  Michel  Angelo  dreamed  would  one  day  stand  alone 


152 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


in  the  silence  of  the  apse  of  St.  Peter’s.  The  visitors 
from  every  nation  who  daily  bend  their  steps  toward 
S.  Pietro  in  Vincoli  amply  confirm  the  saying  of  that 
Cardinal  of  Mantua  who  declared  in  Michel  Angelo’s 
studio : “This  single  statue  does  honor  enough  to  Pope 
Julius’s  tomb.” 

Condivi  writes  of  the  figure : “ Among  the  three 
statues  from  the  hand  of  the  master,  truly  marvellous 
is  that  of  Moses,  leader  and  captain  of  the  Hebrews. 
With  the  air  of  a thinker  and  a sage,  he  sits  holding 
under  his  right  arm  the  tables  of  the  law  ; and  rests  his 
chin  upon  his  left  hand  as  if  worried  and  careworn,  long 
locks  of  his  beard  issuing  through  his  fingers  in  a way 
beautiful  to  see.  His  face,  full  of  vivacity  and  character, 
is  adapted  to  awaken  both  affection  and  terror,  as  was 
perhaps  the  case  in  reality.  In  accordance  with  cus- 
tomary descriptions,  he  has  two  horns  upon  his  head, 
toward  the  top  of  his  brow.  His  mantle,  the  coverings 
of  his  feet,  his  bare  arms,  and  all  the  other  particulars  of 
his  dress,  are  taken  from  the  antique.  A work  of  won- 
derful skill,  especially  in  so  revealing  the  nude  beneath 
beautiful  drapery  as  to  make  the  total  perfection  of  the 
body  visible.”  The  two  horns  issuing  from  the  forehead 
in  all  older  representations  of  Moses  are  the  result  of  a 
mistranslation,  in  the  Septuagint,  of  the  passage  describ- 
ing the  dazzling  brightness  of  his  face  on  descending  from 
Sinai  (Ex.  xxxiv,  29),  the  Hebrew  word  for  rays  mean- 
ing also  horns  as  we  speak  of  a “pencil  ” of  light.  The 
head  is  sometimes  criticised  for  alack  of  cranial  capacity  ; 


MICHEL  ANGELO 


53 


and  in  defence  of  the  opinion  that  the  statue  is  not  now 
seen  at  the  designed  angle,  it  is  noted  that  neither  this 
defect,  nor  that  of  a certain  clumsiness  in  the  drapery 
of  the  right  knee,  is  noticeable  from  the  side.  Condivi 
makes  no  mention  of  any  purpose  on  Michel  Angelo’s 
part  to  image  a special  event  in  the  career  of  Moses, 
and  in  an  account  written  during  the  life  of  the  artist, 
this  silence  is  in  itself  evidence  that  a characterization 
of  his  subject  was  what  he  sought.  Yet  the  statue  as  we 
see  it  at  once  suggests  the  moment  on  Mt.  Sinai  when 
the  idolatrous  acclamation  of  the  golden  calf  first  fell 
on  Moses’  ear.  The  piercing,  sidewise  glance  seems  at- 
tracted by  some  unwelcome  sound  ; the  left  leg  is  drawn 
back  as  if  in  the  next  moment  the  mighty  figure  would 
spring  from  its  seat  ; even  the  arms  have  a startled 
swing.  Nevertheless,  according  to  the  Bible  story,  Moses 
was  not  then  seated,  but  on  his  way  ; nor  was  the  sin  of 
his  people  unknown  to  him,  for  the  Deity  had  foretold 
it  upon  the  mount,  and  not  he  but  Joshua  mistook  the 
uproar  of  the  festival  for  the  din  of  conflict.  The  various 
indications  of  the  statue  in  extant  sketches  of  the  de- 
sign, which  are  regarded  as  proceeding  at  least  from 
Michel  Angelo’s  time,  likewise  present  less  a historical 
personage  than  a symbolical  figure  ; and  from  the  side 
of  the  statue,  when  the  averted  glance  becomes  a gaze 
toward  the  spectator,  its  dramatic  significance  gives  place 
to  an  overwhelming  expression  of  bodily  and  mental 
vigor.  In  spite  of  all  criticisms  and  divergencies  of  inter- 
pretation, it  is  agreed  that  no  human  presence  more 


54 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


sublime  than  Michel  Angelo’s  Moses  is  known  to  sculp- 
ture. 

295.  Head  from  One  of  the  Two  Statues  of  Captives 
designed  for  the  Tomb  of  Pope  Julius  II ; in  the 
Louvre. 

Of  marble  ; probably  begun  soon  after  the  tomb  was  first 
planned  in  1505.  O.  Ollendorf,  “Michel  Angelo’s  Ge- 
fangene  im  Louvre,”  Zeitschrift  fiir  Bildende  Kunst,  IX, 
1897-98,  p.  273. 

In  a letter  to  Pope  Paul  III,  dated  July  20,  1542, 
Michel  Angelo  writes  in  regard  to  two  partly  wrought 
figures  of  captives,  forming  part  of  what  he  had  thus 
far  accomplished  on  the  monument  to  Pope  Julius,  that 
having  originally  entered  into  a much  more  ambitious 
design,  they  were  in  no  way  suited  to  the  plan  as  since 
reduced ; and  he  proposes  to  substitute  for  them  two 
figures,  of  the  Active  and  the  Contemplative  Life  (Leah 
and  Rachel),  an  offer  in  the  event  accepted.  Two  years 
later,  after  an  illness  during  which  he  had  been  cared 
for  in  the  Strozzi  Palace  at  Rome,  Michel  Angelo,  out  of 
gratitude,  gave  the  two  statues  of  captives  to  Roberto 
degli  Strozzi.  He  in  turn  presented  them  to  King  Fran- 
cis the  First  of  France,  who  gave  them  to  the  Consta- 
ble Anne  de  Montmorency,  the  portal  of  whose  magni- 
ficent chateau  at  Ecouen  they  adorned  until  removed  by 
Richelieu  to  a castle  in  Poitou,  whence  the  last  Mare- 
chal  de  Richelieu  brought  them  to  Paris,  his  widow  plac- 
ing them  in  her  hotel  in  the  Faubourg  du  Roule,  and  leav- 
ing them  there  in  a stable  on  changing  her  residence. 


MICHEL  ANGELO 


1 55 


In  this  neglect  they  were  found  by  Alexandre  Lenoir, 
who  purchased  them  in  1793  for  the  French  nation. 

According  to  Condivi,  the  figures  of  captives  grouped 
in  pairs  on  either  side  of  niches  about  the  base  of  the 
Julius  monument  symbolized  the  Arts  reduced  to  impo- 
tence by  the  death  of  their  greatest  patron.  Vasari 
speaks  of  them  as  the  representatives  of  subjugated 
provinces;  and  as  Julius  had  hardly  entered  upon  his 
career  of  conquest  in  1505,  they  are  by  this  interpreta- 
tion prophecies  of  a coming  glory;  but  there  is  no  foun- 
dation for  either  of  these  allegorical  readings  in  the 
figures  themselves.  Four  rough-hewn  statues  in  a grotto 
in  the  Boboli  Gardens  in  Florence  are,  it  is  thought, 
other  figures  of  captives  for  the  monument  to  Pope 
Julius,  but  their  different  dimensions  connect  them  with 
another  plan  than  that  for  which  those  of  the  Louvre 
were  designed.  Neither  from  these  grotto  figures,  which 
may  have  been  the  “ certain  marbles  ” that  occupied 
Michel  Angelo,  according  to  Condivi,  after  the  abandon- 
ment of  the  facade  of  S.  Lorenzo,  nor  from  contempo- 
rary sketches,  can  it  now  be  definitely  determined  what 
other  aspects  of  an  unavailing  struggle  against  an  over- 
powering fate  had  presented  themselves  to  Michel 
Angelo’s  imagination.  The  two  statues  in  the  Louvre 
image  two  extremes  of  conduct  under  captivity,  — the 
highest  pitch  of  resistance  and  its  absolute  cessation. 
That  from  which  the  present  head  was  taken  — the  head 
of  the  other  statue  is  still  unfinished  — portrays  a youth 
of  magnificent  beauty  of  form  and  melancholy  loveliness 


156 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


of  feature  standing,  slightly  reclined,  against  a support 
to  which  he  is  attached  by  a light  band  of  drapery  about 
the  breast.  His  eyes  are  closed  ; one  hand  is  under  his 
drooping  head,  the  other  at  his  breast ; his  limbs  give 
way  as  if  overborne  by  the  massive  body.  The  surren- 
der of  so  powerful  a frame  to  a restraining  force  seem- 
ingly so  frail  argues  weariness  of  life  rather  than  spent 
energy.  The  lines  of  Tennyson, — 

“ . . . I am  sick  of  Time, 

And  I desire  to  rest,” 

or  those  of  Shakespeare,  — 

“ . . . My  long  sickness 
Of  health  and  living  now  begins  to  mend, 

And  nothing  brings  me  all  things,” 

fail,  in  that  they  are  still  speech,  of  the  impressiveness 
of  this  marble. 

No  work  of  Michel  Angelo  has  met  with  higher  praise, 
and  none  has  been  more  variously  interpreted.  It  has 
been  called  an  emotional  masterpiece,  his  happiest  turn 
of  expression,  the  most  beautiful  of  his  works,  and  de- 
scribed as  sleep,  or  exhaustion  after  vain  efforts  for 
freedom,  or  a moment  of  respite  from  suffering ; and 
again  as  a representation  of  the  genius  of  eternal  rest, 
or  an  embodiment  of  the  instant  of  transition  from  life 
to  immortality.  Doubtless  the  enigma  existed  even  in 
Michel  Angelo’s  thoughts,  and  directly  resulted  from  his 
choosing  to  intrust  the  expression  of  an  entire  abandon- 
ment of  effort  to  a figure  but  lightly  confined  and  still 
standing  erect. 


MICHEL  ANGELO 


57 


614,  613.  Tombs  of  the  Medici ; in  the  new  sacristy  of 
the  church  of  S.  Lorenzo  in  Florence.  Tomb  of  Giuliano 
de’  Medici  (d.  1516),  Duke  of  Nemours  : with  figures  of 
Night  and  Day.  Tomb  of  Lorenzo  de’  Medici  (d.  1519), 
Duke  of  Urbino ; with  figures  of  Evening  and  Dawn. 

Of  marble  ; begun  in  1521  and  left  unfinished  in  1534. 

The  commission  for  the  new  sacristy  at  S.  Lorenzo  in 
Florence,  given  to  Michel  Angelo  by  Leo  X in  1519, 
was  one  that  might  well  have  inspired  in  the  mind  of 
the  artist  reflections  upon  Time,  the  devourer  of  all 
things,  upon  the  irony  of  fate  and  the  vanity  of  human 
wishes.  In  1512,  after  eighteen  years’  exile,  Giuliano  de’ 
Medici  the  younger,  son  of  Lorenzo  the  Magnificent, 
had  returned  to  Florence  as  the  virtual  head  of  the  state. 
In  the  following  year  his  only  surviving  brother,  Gio- 
vanni, had  become  Pope  Leo  X.  In  1515,  through  his 
marriage  with  Philiberte  de  Savoie,  aunt  of  the  young 
King  Francis  the  First,  Giuliano  had  made  the  brilliant 
alliance  which  was  eventually  to  bring  his  grandniece 
Catherine  to  the  throne  of  France  as  the  queen  of 
Henry  II.  His  cousin  Giulio  had  been  made  Cardinal, 
and  his  nephew  Lorenzo  the  younger,  with  the  aid  of 
Pope  Leo,  was  preparing  to  wrest  from  its  rightful 
possessor  the  Dukedom  of  Urbino.  Supported  by  the 
prestige  of  France,  of  which  Giuliano’s  title  as  Due  de 
Nemours  was  the  symbol  — Nemours  being  a duchy  of 
the  French  crown  — and  backed  by  the  power  of  the 
church,  the  future  of  the  ancient  line  of  the  Medici  as 
masters  of  Florence  seemed  assured.  There  was  even 


58 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


dreamed  for  his  nephew  Lorenzo  a kingdom  which 
should  make  the  family  lords  of  united  Italy  ; and  sharing 
in  this  hope  Machiavelli  dedicated  to  him  the  famous 
“ Principe.”  Only  length  of  days  was  needed  to  reaffirm 
their  power,  and  rightful  male  offspring  to  perpetuate  it ; 
but  neither  was  granted  them.  In  i5i6Giuliano  died, 
leaving  no  issue  by  his  royal  wife,  and  one  illegitimate 
son,  Ippolito,  who  was  to  die  at  twenty-four  as  a car- 
dinal. Lorenzo,  to  whom  his  uncle  had  given  over  the 
government  of  Florence  in  1513,  survived  him  but  three 
years,  leaving  one  legitimate  daughter,  Catherine,  and  a 
putative  son,  Alessandro,  by  a Moorish  slave  ; and  the 
control  of  the  city  passed  to  Cardinal  Giulio,  himself  an 
illegitimate  son.  The  rightful  line  of  Cosimo  the  Elder 
had  received  its  deathblow  and  would  expire  with  Pope 
Leo.  From  his  long-cherished  and  magnificent  plans 
for  a fagade  at  S.  Lorenzo,  the  pope  thus  suddenly  made 
the  last  heir  of  the  ancient  name  turned  forthwith  to 
the  project  of  a mortuary  chapel,  which  should  pre- 
serve the  memory  of  the  two  dukes  upon  whom  the 
hopes  of  their  line  for  continued  political  ascendency 
had  so  confidently  rested. 

A letter  from  Cardinal  Giulio  dated  November  20, 

1520,  acknowledges  Michel  Angelo’s  sketch  for  the  pro- 
posed sacristy,  and  affidavits  of  quarrymen  dated  in  April, 

1521,  preserved  in  the  municipal  archives  of  Carrara,  re- 
cord his  orders  for  three  hundred  cartloads  of  marble  to 
be  on  shipboard  by  October,  1522,  together  with  several 
figures  to  be  rough-hewn,  among  them  a seated  Madonna. 


MICHEL  ANGELO 


59 


The  death  of  Pope  Leo  a few  months  later,  the  political 
schemes  and  pecuniary  anxieties  of  the  cardinal,  and 
renewed  menaces  of  legal  proceedings  from  the  heirs  of 
Pope  Julius,  put  a stop  for  two  years  to  all  progress  on 
the  new  commission.  But  in  November,  1523,  Cardinal 
Giulio  ascended  the  papal  throne  as  Clement  VII,  and 
although  he  began  at  once  to  occupy  Michel  Angelo  with 
injudicious  commissions,  first  the  Laurentian  Library, 
then  a tabernacle  for  S.  Lorenzo,  and  later  even  a colos- 
sus for  the  Medicean  gardens,  the  work  continued  to  ad- 
vance for  three  years,  with  long  interruptions  due  to  the 
threatening  insistence  of  the  heirs  of  Julius.  In  May  of 
1527,  the  fourth  year  of  Clement’s  pontificate,  the  troops 
of  Charles  V were  masters  of  Rome,  and  the  pope  a pris- 
oner in  the  Castle  of  S.  Angelo.  On  receipt  of  the  news 
the  Florentines  at  once  exiled  the  two  young  heirs  of  the 
Medici  name,  Ippolito  and  Alessandro,  and  prepared  for 
a final  fight  for  liberty.  Michel  Angelo,  divided  at  first 
between  two  allegiances,  was  not  long  in  yielding  to  the 
call  of  his  native  city  in  a peril  that  before  many  months 
became  desperate,  and  in  1529  was  appointed  director 
of  the  fortifications.  In  August  of  1530,  after  a resistance 
whose  noble  enthusiasm  recalled  the  days  of  Savonarola, 
Florence  surrendered  to  the  imperial  power,  with  which 
the  pope  had  already  come  to  terms,  and  in  1531  Ales- 
sandro returned  to  undertake  at  twenty  years  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  conquered  city.  The  church  tower  of  S. 
Niccolo  oltr  Arno  is  said  to  have  afforded  Michel  Angelo 
a refuge  during  the  first  few  days  after  the  end  of  the 


i6o 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


siege ; but  Clement  had  no  wish  to  lose  his  services,  and 
November  saw  him  again  at  work  upon  the  tombs,  al- 
though for  a long  time  thereafter  in  a state  of  depression, 
physical  and  mental,  that  awakened  the  gravest  fears  for 
his  life.  During  the  plague  that  visited  Florence  before 
the  siege,  his  best  loved  brother,  Buonarroto,  had  died  in 
his  arms.  Now  at  last  he  consented  to  accept  the  aid  of 
others  in  the  completion  of  the  monument  to  Pope  Julius, 
as  well  as  in  the  sculptures  of  the  sacristy;  and  his  time 
for  several  years  was  divided  between  the  two  commis- 
sions. In  spite  of  the  papal  protection,  his  life  was  inse- 
cure in  Florence.  He  had  irritated  the  young  tyrant 
Alessandro  by  refusing  to  plan  a fortress  which  should 
dominate  the  city ; and  it  was  by  a favor  of  heaven,  Con- 
divi  writes,  that  when  on  September  25,  1534,  Clement 
VII  died,  Michel  Angelo  was  in  Rome  and  beyond  the 
reach  of  Alessandro’s  violence.  He  never  returned  to 
Florence  ; and  work  upon  the  sacristy  stopped  at  once  and 
finally.  In  1537  the  sarcophagus  of  Lorenzo  was  opened 
and  the  remains  of  his  murdered  son  Alessandro  depos- 
ited therein  ; and  when  in  1875,  in  the  course  of  repairs 
to  the  monument,  it  was  reopened,  the  two  bodies  were 
found  as  they  had  been  placed,  with  the  head  of  one  lying 
between  the  feet  of  the  other. 

The  Medici  chapel  is  a quadrangular  vaulted  apartment, 
corresponding  in  form  and  size  to  Brunelleschi’s  sacristy 
of  1421  across  the  church,  and  lighted  from  the  lantern 
crowning  its  dome.  Along  the  entrance  wall  stand  Michel 
Angelo’s  unfinished  group  of  the  Madonna  and  Child,  and 


MICHEL  ANGELO 


161 


two  statues  of  patron  saints  of  the  Medici,  SS.  Cosmo 
and  Damian,  the  former  by  Giovanni  da  Montorsoli,  the 
latter  by  Raphael  da  Montelupo.  The  altar,  in  a large 
niche  and  bearing  candlesticks  designed  by  Michel  An- 
gelo, occupies  the  opposite  wall ; while  of  the  remaining 
two  each  is  filled  by  the  tomb  of  one  of  the  Dukes,  in  a 
setting  of  pilasters,  niches,  and  cornices.  The  project,  as 
at  first  conceived  by  Pope  Leo  and  Cardinal  Giulio  to- 
gether, appears  to  have  included  also  a tomb  for  the  father 
of  each,  Lorenzo  the  Magnificent  and  Giuliano  his  brother. 
Upon  the  resumption  of  the  work  by  Giulio  alone,  after 
his  election  as  the  second  Medici  pope,  tombs  were  pro- 
posed not  only  for  the  two  “ Magnifici  ” of  Florence,  and 
the  two  dukes  allied  by  marriage  with  France,  but  for 
the  two  popes  through  whom  the  family  had  obtained  its 
notable  ecclesiastical  distinction.  But  of  this  larger  plan 
nothing  further  is  heard.  The  lost  sketch  of  1520,  incor- 
porating Michel  Angelo’s  first  ideas,  showed  four  tombs 
standing  free  in  the  chapel ; but  limitations  of  space  for- 
bade this  arrangement,  and  extant  sketches  either  exe- 
cuted or  inspired  by  Michel  Angelo  show  mural  tombs, 
either  arranged  in  pairs,  with  figures  both  upon  the  sar- 
cophagi and  beneath  and  above  in  niches,  or,  as  in  that 
dated  June  16,  1 524,  single  and  substantially  of  the  existing 
form.  In  a letter  dated  1526  Michel  Angelo  enumerates 
eleven  figures  which  he  proposes  to  make  with  his  own 
hand ; four,  representing  rivers,  to  be  placed  upon  the 
ground  : the  four  upon  the  sarcophagi ; the  two  portrait 
statues,  and  the  Madonna  “ that  goes  in  the  tomb  at  the 


1 62  ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 

head.”  If  we  may  interpret  this  phrase  as  a reference  to  a 
tomb  for  the  entrance  wall,  where  the  Madonna  and  saints 
now  stand,  and  may  connect  it  with  one  of  the  sketches 
showing  two  sarcophagi,  a central  figure  of  the  Madonna, 
and  figures  in  niches  on  either  side,  this  may  have  been  the 
place  and  these  the  statues  destined  for  the  double  monu- 
ment of  the  two  Magnifici,  Lorenzo  and  Giuliano.  They 
are  then  fragments  of  a lost  Medici  tomb ; one  which  the 
artist’s  burdens,  his  patron’s  difficulties,  and  the  long  tra- 
gedy of  the  siege  combined  to  render  impossible  of  execu- 
tion. Again  there  had  lain  in  Michel  Angelo’s  imagina- 
tion a work  of  sculpture,  in  union  with  architecture  and 
painting,  more  magnificent  than  any  the  world  possesses  ; 
and  again  the  powers  of  hand  and  brain  that  could  have 
brought  it  forth  were  ready,  both  in  himself  and  in  the 
aids  about  him  ; but  again  the  fates  willed  otherwise,  al- 
though by  a happier  decree  determining  its  abandonment 
instead  of  its  unworthy  completion.  The  four  figures  of 
rivers  were  never  begun  ; the  group  of  the  Madonna  has 
remained  incompletely  carried  out,  it  is  said  on  account 
of  the  insufficiency  of  the  block  ; all  the  symbolic  figures 
were  left  likewise  in  greater  or  less  measure  rough- 
hewn  ; neither  the  four  figures  for  niches  on  either  side 
the  dukes,  nor  the  eight  for  tabernacles  over  the  doors 
were  ever  executed  ; the  walls  were  never  adorned  with 
paintings  ; the  elaborate  decoration  of  the  vaulting  that 
Giovanni  da  Udine  brought  to  within  a fortnight  of  com- 
pletion remained  at  that  point,  and  has  since  been  white- 
washed over  ; only  the  statues  of  the  two  dukes  and  of  the 


MICHEL  ANGELO 


163 


saints  were  finished,  and  all  were  left  about  the  chapel 
to  be  put  in  place  without  Michel  Angelo’s  supervision. 
At  the  time  of  Vasari’s  visit,  a year  or  two  after  the 
death  of  Clement  VII,  the  figures  were  still  upon  the 
ground.  On  two  occasions,  just  before  the  murder  of 
Alessandro  in  1537,  and  in  1562,  not  long  before  Michel 
Angelo’s  death,  the  same  faithful  friend  attempted,  but 
in  vain,  to  arrange  with  the  family  for  the  completion  of 
the  sacristy  under  the  direction  of  its  designer.  Both 
figures  and  walls  had  been  shamefully  smoked  by  the 
braziers  of  the  priests,  and  the  use  of  the  chapel  as  a 
sacristy  has  since  been  discontinued. 

The  architecture  of  the  two  tombs  is  identical  in  all 
but  two  bits  of  ornament  which  appear  in  that  of  Lo- 
renzo only.  A heavy  cornice  divides  the  wall  at  less 
than  half  its  height  into  a panelled  surface  below  and  a 
row  of  three  niches  above,  separated  by  double  pilasters 
and  crowned  by  an  entablature.  The  side  niches,  which 
are  empty,  are  treated  as  doors  with  rounded  pediments, 
to  which  in  the  central  niche,  occupied  by  the  figure 
of  the  duke,  corresponds  a panel,  as  if  for  an  inscription. 
The  surface  below  the  cornice  forms  a background  for 
the  simple  and  comparatively  small  sarcophagus,  which 
rests  on  two  supports  rising  from  a heavy  foundation 
slab,  and  is  covered  by  a massive  convex  top.  This  re- 
peats the  form  of  the  pediments  over  the  side  niches 
above,  but  is  interrupted  at  the  centre  directly  beneath 
the  figure  of  the  duke,  the  two  segments  giving  the  two 
symbolical  figures  upon  them  the  position  of  pendants 


64 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


to  the  portrait  statue  above  and  between  them.  The 
architecture  is  that  of  a sculptor,  a background  providing 
for  the  advantageous  disposition  of  a group  of  sculptured 
figures,  but  showing  behind  them  little  adornment  other 
than  the  mouldings  which  emphasize  its  elements. 

Neither  of  the  portrait  statues  can  claim  to  be  a like- 
ness of  its  subject,  or  even  a close  characterization. 
The  composer  of  a sonnet  in  defence  of  suicide,  he  who 
resigned  his  sovereignty  in  Florence  after  a year,  is  repre- 
sented with  muscles  bared,  and  in  an  attitude  expres- 
sive of  energy  latent ; while  it  is  the  victor  in  a fight  for 
a dukedom,  the  possessor  of  no  inconsiderable  strength 
of  character,  and,  according  to  the  indications  of  his 
skeleton,  of  exceptional  physical  force,  whose  body  is 
covered  and  whose  attitude  is  one  of  abstraction,  if  not 
of  irresolution.  The  heads  represent  types  characteris- 
tic of  Michel  Angelo,  that  of  Giuliano  not  unlike  the 
unfinished  Madonna,  and  showing  the  lack  of  cranial 
capacity  so  often  a disappointment  in  Michel  Angelo’s 
figures ; and  the  frames  are  of  the  imposing  build  he 
so  delighted  in  representing.  The  two  figures  fit  their 
names  chiefly  in  that  one  images  the  commander,  the 
other  the  warrior.  With  the  staff  of  authority  lightly 
held  across  his  knees,  Giuliano  sits  in  an  attitude  of 
ease,  but  not  inaction,  as  one  who  might  grant  an  audi- 
ence or  judge  a cause.  In  the  tension  of  the  brow  and 
the  shadows  about  the  mouth  there  speaks,  if  not  sym- 
pathy, at  least  consideration  ; if  not  justice  tempered 
with  mercy,  at  least  the  will  to  comprehend  and  deal 


MICHEL  ANGELO 


1 65 

adequately.  Yet  it  is  in  the  massive  body,  with  its 
powerful  and  harmonious  lines  and  volumes,  with  its 
impressively  modelled  breast  and  knees  and  hands  and 
feet,  and  with  its  wonderful  attire,  surely  such  as  was 
never  worn,  or  even  imagined  before,  save  by  Michel 
Angelo,  that  the  interest  of  the  figure  is  mainly  con- 
tained. Full  sleeves  and  a yoke  with  grotesques,  one 
scowling,  the  others  laughing,  as  if  the  extremes  between 
which  the  face  above  holds  the  balance,  a heavily  fringed 
skirt  about  the  waist,  and  leggings  ending  at  the  calf 
and  midway  of  the  foot,  give  the  figure  a curious  am- 
biguity between  clothed  and  nude. 

In  the  figure  of  Lorenzo,  the  thoughtful,  “il  pensoso,” 
as  Vasari  calls  it,  the  opposite  emphasis  prevails.  He 
is  represented  fully  clothed,  and  in  spite  of  his  striking 
pose  and  the  original  details  of  his  martial  dress,  the 
weight  of  interest  centres  in  the  face,  and  even  in  the 
eyes,  shadowed  under  his  strange  helmet  carved  partly 
in  the  semblance  of  a lion’s  head.  With  Giuliano  it  is 
areas  of  light,  in  the  face,  the  arms,  the  breast  and  abdo- 
men, that  chiefly  attract  the  eye,  and  with  Lorenzo  spots 
of  darkness,  in  the  helmet,  the  head  and  shoulders,  the 
right  side,  and  below  the  knees.  These  effects  of  light 
and  shadow,  unquestionably  intended  by  Michel  Angelo, 
since  he  worked  upon  the  groups  in  the  sacristy  under 
the  high  lighting  he  had  himself  arranged  for  them,  are 
lost  in  a lower  light  such  as  the  present  casts  receive. 
In  the  pose  of  body  and  members  also,  this  figure  bal- 
ances that  of  Giuliano.  The  lines  of  the  knees  and 


66 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


hands  run  upward  from  left  to  right ; the  opposite  in 
each  case  to  their  direction  in  the  figure  of  Giuliano. 
The  features  also  are  rounder,  the  hands  plumper;  and 
this  may  have  been  an  intentional  verisimilitude,  for 
Lorenzo  died  still  a youth,  his  uncle  later  in  life. 
Deep  sunken  as  he  seems  in  thought,  it  is  not  listless 
dreaming  that  would  forget  the  right  hand  in  its  twisted 
pose,  or  maintain  the  casket,  carved  like  a bat  in  allusion 
to  the  figures  of  Evening  and  Dawn  below,  upon  its 
uncertain  support.  His  glance  seeks  in  the  future  an 
outlet  for  the  fire  that  smoulders  within  him.  In  the 
statue  of  Giuliano  also,  though  the  left  hand  rests,  the 
right  hand  fingers  the  staff  nervously. 

In  both  allegorical  groups  by  which  the  portrait 
statues  are  accompanied,  the  expression  of  an  uncertain 
position  upon  an  insufficient  base,  so  frequent  with 
Michel  Angelo,  is  emphasized  to  the  point  of  discomfort. 
The  impossibility  that  human  beings  should  thus  main- 
tain themselves  gives  to  these  representatives  of  the 
flight  of  the  hours  the  aspect  rather  of  floating  above 
than  of  resting  upon  the  inclines  they  occupy  ; and 
thereby,  perhaps,  Michel  Angelo  sought  to  convey  the 
fugitive  essence  of  the  abstractions  they  embody.  A 
written  interpretation  of  one  of  the  groups,  still  pre- 
served in  Michel  Angelo’s  own  hand  upon  a scrap  of 
paper  containing  a sketch,  runs  as  follows  : “ Day  and 
Night  speak  and  say  : We  have  brought  with  our  rapid 
flight  Duke  Giuliano  to  death  ; it  is  entirely  just  that  he 
should  revenge  himself  upon  us  ; and  his  vengeance  is 


MICHEL  ANGELO 


167 


this ; that  he  through  his  death  has  deprived  us,  who 
have  killed  him,  of  light,  and  with  his  closed  eyes  has 
shut  ours  also,  that  no  longer  illuminate  the  world. 
What  would  he  have  done  with  us  had  he  lived  ? ” 
There  is  little  hint  of  such  speech  in  the  figures  as  they 
were  ultimately  carried  out,  but  the  quotation  reveals 
the  fundamental  idea  from  which  Michel  Angelo  worked. 
It  determines  also  the  names  of  the  group  it  mentions ; 
those  of  the  figures  upon  Lorenzo’s  tomb  being  affixed 
by  tradition  only,  confirmed  by  the  correspondence  of 
their  sex  with  the  gender  of  the  Italian  words,  “II  Cre- 
puscolo”  and  “L’  Aurora.” 

Contrasts  corresponding  to  those  presented  by  the 
two  portrait  figures  may  be  found  as  well  in  their  sym- 
bolic attendants.  Night  and  Day  below  the  statue  of 
Giuliano  appear,  like  that  figure,  studies  in  surfaces  of 
light.  The  broad  bosom  and  mighty  thigh  of  Night  are 
illuminated  throughout ; while  the  whole  figure  of  Day 
is  a blaze  of  splendor,  the  great  head  peering  over  his 
shoulder  like  the  rising  sun,  an  expressive  counterpart 
to  the  unconscious  and  averted  face  of  Night.  The  dark 
surfaces  in  the  other  figures,  under  the  supporting  arms 
of  both,  under  the  breast  of  Dawn,  along  the  whole  body 
of  Evening,  and  in  the  pendant  extremities,  draw  the 
eye  like  those  of  Lorenzo  above  them — although  only 
in  a vertical  light  like  that  of  the  chapel.  The  feet  reach 
below  the  sarcophagus,  almost  into  its  shadow ; and 
thus  reclined  at  length  in  flowing  curves,  the  two  bodies 
vividly  image  the  relaxation  of  a period  between  sleep 


1 68  ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 

and  waking.  Their  attitude  is  closely  symmetrical,  the 
heads  and  shoulders  set  similarly  above  the  horizontal 
line  of  the  thighs,  the  right  foot  of  Evening  crossed  in 
front  as  the  left  foot  of  Dawn  is  supported  from  behind. 
But  the  figure  of  Evening  sinks  into  sleep,  that  of  Dawn 
stirs  from  it ; his  head  droops,  and  his  right  arm  and 
leg  have  found  positions  of  rest,  while  her  head  and  arm 
are  in  movement,  and  her  left  leg  prepares  for  an  effort 
to  rise.  To  this  pattern  of  dreamy  quiescence  the  steeper 
slopes  and  sharper  angles  of  the  group  of  Night  and 
Day  offer  a marked  contrast.  In  the  striking  motive  of 
the  two  knees  drawn  high  up,  the  same  instinct  of  plas- 
tic balance  has  served  to  indicate  in  Day  the  vigor  of 
waking  life,  and  in  Night  its  reflection  in  troubled  sleep. 
Her  contorted  arms  and  the  abandonment  of  weariness 
in  her  bent  neck  reinforce  this  impression,  and  the  sym- 
bols carved  about  this  figure  alone  of  the  four  complete 
it ; beneath  her  foot  a heavy  bundle  of  poppies,  upon  her 
head  the  crescent  and  a star,  in  the  angle  of  her  knee 
an  owl,  at  her  side  the  mask  of  dreams,  both  empty  and 
unhumanly  expressive.  Who  has  stood  by  a bedside  of 
suffering  and  seen  its  victim,  exhausted  by  tossing  in 
pain,  suddenly  grow  still  for  an  instant  of  unconscious- 
ness, needs  not  be  told  the  inner  significance  of  an  atti- 
tude like  this,  or  of  the  tangled  drapery  and  momentary 
pose  of  the  Ariadne  of  the  Vatican,  to  which  the  statue 
of  Night  has  been  likened.  The  motive  of  another  of 
the  figures,  that  of  Evening,  its  members  dissolved  in 
fatigue,  its  body  hugging  the  ground,  has  been  related 


MICHEL  ANGELO 


69 


in  like  manner  to  that  of  an  antique  work,  the  Farnese 
Hercules  of  the  Naples  Museum,  as  he  stands  winded 
and  sweating,  all  his  gigantic  energy  utterly  spent. 

The  portentous  political  change  whose  crowning 
events,  the  sack  of  Rome  and  the  siege  of  Florence,  fell 
within  the  period  of  Michel  Angelo’s  work  upon  the 
Medici  tombs,  has  been  conceived  to  reflect  itself  in 
these,  the  masterpieces  of  his  chisel ; as  if  he  had  wrought 
into  them  his  lament  over  the  lost  liberties  of  his  native 
land.  But  the  chronology  of  the  work  negatives  the 
idea  ; for  his  letter  to  Fattucci  in  1 526,  before  the  storm 
of  war  that  was  to  overwhelm  Florence  had  begun  to 
gather,  records  that  all  of  the  figures  except  one  of  the 
portraits  were  already  begun.  We  must  conclude  that 
it  was  only  by  an  application  to  later  conditions  of  an 
originally  wider  spiritual  meaning,  and  one  already  em- 
bodied in  the  sleeping  captive  of  the  Louvre,  that  Michel 
Angelo,  in  response  to  Strozzi’s  compliment  in  verse, 
affixed  to  the  figure  of  Night,  wrote  asking  in  her  name 
for  undisturbed  unconsciousness,  in  words  whose  beauty 
cannot  be  transferred  from  the  Italian  : — 

“ Caro  m’  e ’1  sonno,  e piu  1’  esser  di  sasso ; 

Mentre  che  ’1  danno  e la  vergogna  dura, 

Non  veder,  non  sentir  m’  e gran  ventura. 

Pero  non  mi  destar,  deh ! parla  basso.”  1 

1 Strozzi  wrote : “ Night,  whom  thou  seest  so  gently  sleeping,  was 
carved  by  an  Angel  from  this  stone  ; and,  sleeping,  lives.  If  thou  believe 
it  not,  awake  her  and  she  will  speak  to  thee.”  Michel  Angelo  replied, 
“ Sleep  is  dear  to  me,  still  more  to  be  of  stone.  While  ruin  and  disgrace 
abide,  neither  to  see  nor  hear  is  happy  fortune.  Therefore  awake  me 
not ; prithee,  speak  low.” 


170 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


Attributed  to  Michel  Angelo. 

42.  Statue  known  as  Cupid ; in  the  Victoria  and  Albert 
Museum,  South  Kensington. 

Of  marble ; supposed  to  have  been  executed  in  1497. 

J.  C.  Robinson,  “ Catalogue  of  Italian  Sculpture,”  South 

Kensington  Museum,  1862,  p.  133. 

Current  critical  opinion  is  inclined  to  indorse  the 
attribution  of  this  statue  to  Michel  Angelo,  founded,  at 
its  discovery  fifty  years  ago,  upon  considerations  of  style 
alone.  In  1852  Professor  Miliarini  and  the  sculptor  San- 
tarelli,  examining  together  the  sculptures  in  the  Gual- 
fonda  gardens  in  Florence  in  the  interest  of  a Roman 
collector,  Signor  Gigli,  came  upon  this  statue  in  a cellar, 
and  at  once  concluded  it  to  be  Michel  Angelo’s  work. 
The  left  arm  was  missing,  the  right  wrist  fractured,  and 
there  were  marks  of  bullets  upon  it  in  various  places. 
With  its  companions  it  had  doubtless  during  centuries 
before  been  the  ornament  of  the  gardens,  after  the 
Italian  custom  which  had  brought  to  Michel  Angelo 
himself  in  the  gardens  of  Lorenzo  the  Magnificent  the 
first  impulse  toward  the  art  of  sculpture.  In  1859  it  was 
purchased  for  the  South  Kensington  Museum,  where  it 
now  stands,  the  left  arm  being  a restoration  by  Santa- 
relli.  Of  external  evidence  connecting  such  a figure 
with  Michel  Angelo  there  is  none  other  than  the  men- 
tion in  several  contemporary  records  of  a life-size  marble 
Cupid  (or  Apollo,  according  to  one)  which,  together 
with  a statue  of  Bacchus,  he  executed  during  his  first 
stay  in  Rome  for  a Roman  gentleman,  Jacopo  Galli. 


MICHEL  ANGELO 


171 


Eight  years  after  Michel  Angelo’s  death  the  latter  statue 
was  disposed  of  by  Galli’s  heirs  and  came  to  Florence, 
where  it  now  stands  in  the  Museo  Nazionale  ; but  of 
the  former  nothing  was  heard  until  the  discovery  of  the 
present  figure  in  our  own  time. 

The  statue  represents  a youth  whose  perfectly  devel- 
oped body  and  members  indicate  approaching  manhood. 
He  kneels  upon  his  right  knee,  with  the  right  hand 
upon  the  ground  before  him,  and  holds  his  left  arm 
uplifted.  The  action  commonly  ascribed  to  the  figure, 
that  of  stooping  to  reach  a fallen  arrow,  is  conjectural, 
for  the  left  hand  holds  a bow  only  by  the  fancy  of  the 
sculptor  that  restored  it,  and  there  is  no  hint  of  an  arrow 
upon  the  ground  or  in  the  right  hand,  which  grasps  a 
bulkier  object.  Yet  the  quiver  at  his  side  seems  at  least 
to  fix  the  subject  as  either  Apollo  or  Cupid  ; and  regard- 
ing it  as  a representation  of  one  of  these  gods,  a concep- 
tion emerges  that  suggests  the  same  origin  as  the  Bac- 
chus. The  expression  of  both  is  vivid,  even  violent,  but 
there  is  in  neither  figure  the  grandeur  that  should  reveal 
the  deity.  The  Bacchus  images  a young  tippler  whose 
body  already  begins  to  show  his  excesses,  and  whose 
drunken  glance  betrays  a mind  habituated  to  vacuity  ; 
the  present  figure,  a being  active  and  powerful,  but 
without  a trace  of  tenderness  or  sprightliness  or  pas- 
sion. In  neither  of  these  statues,  which  with  the  Adonis 
of  the  Museo  Nazionale  are  his  only  larger  illustrations 
of  pagan  antiquity,  has  Michel  Angelo  shown  any  incli- 
nation to  penetrate  deeply  into  the  spirit  of  ancient 


72 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  SCULPTURE 


mythology.  One  must  admire  in  this  figure  the  expres- 
sion of  elastic  strength  in  the  momentary  attitude,  and 
the  masterly  beauty  of  the  composition,  from  whatever 
point  of  view  beheld  ; and  both  are  evidences  of  Michel 
Angelo’s  authorship.  The  drapery  and  the  hair  are  not 
wholly  complete,  and  this  fact  might  seem  a confirma- 
tion were  not  all  the  known  products  of  his  chisel  at 
this  time  distinguished  by  their  perfect  and  elaborate 
finish. 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  ORNAMENT 


576.  BRESCIA.  Casa  Raimondi.  Console. 

510,583.1.  FLORENCE.  S.  Croce.  Console  and  bracket;  from 

the  pulpit  by  Benedetto  da  Maiano. 

S.  Croce.  Relief  of  the  Annunciation 
with  figures  of  saints  : Della  Robbia. 

S.  Lorenzo.  Fragment  of  cornice  from 
the  tombs  of  the  Medici  by  Michel  An- 
gelo. 

S.  Trinita.  Frieze  from  the  tomb  of 
Francesco  Sassetti  by  Giuliano  di  San 
Gallo.  The  relief  on  the  right  represents 
the  myth  of  Meleager,  apparently  follow- 
ing an  antique  sarcophagus,  still  preserved 
in  Florence.  F.  Schottmiiller,  “ Reper- 
torium  fur  Kunstwissenschaft,”  XXV, 
1902,  p.  406. 


593- 

LODI. 

Church  of  the  Incoronata.  Con- 
sole. 

557,  578. 

LUCCA. 

Cathedral.  Two  panels  from  the  altar 
of  St.  Regulus  by  Matteo  Civitali  (1484). 

594- 

MILAN. 

S.  Maria  della  Passione.  Ornament 
from  the  tomb  of  Archbishop  Birago  by 
Andrea  Fusina  (1495). 

575  a. 

Ospedale  Maggiore.  Sarcophagus  of 
Daniel  Birago. 

449-o- 

414. 

128. 


74 


ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  ORNAMENT 


55  W- 

PADUA. 

S.  Antonio.  Seven  panels  in  flat  relief ; 
from  the  pillars  of  the  Cappella  del 
Santo,  by  Giovanni  Minello,  Jacopo  San- 
savino,  and  others  (sixteenth  century). 

566. 

PAVIA. 

Certosa.  Capital. 

569- 

PISA. 

Cathedral.  Base  of  a pilaster  in  the 
choir  by  Staggio  Stagi  (sixteenth  century). 

5°4’ 

ROME. 

S.  Maria  Sopra  Minerva.  Panel  from 
the  tomb  of  Juan  de  Coca,  Bishop  of 
Calahorra  in  Spain  (1477). 

9*4- 

S.  Maria  della  Pace.  Fragment  of 
ornament  from  the  tomb  of  Beatrix  and 
Lavinia  Ponzetti  (1508). 

505»  955»  95& 

S.  Maria  del  Popolo.  Frieze  and  two 
panels  from  the  tombs  of  Cardinals  Basso 
and  Sforza  in  the  choir  by  Andrea  Sansa- 
vino  (1505-1507). 

587- 

Sistine  Chapel.  Panel  from  the  choir- 
screen  (fifteenth  century). 

559>  560,  563- 

SIENA. 

Cathedral.  Two  balusters  and  two 

564- 

panels  from  the  stairway  of  the  pulpit, 
by  Bernardino  di  Giacomo  (1543). 

57°- 

Church  of  Fontegiusta.  Capital 
(about  1500). 

575" 

TORTONA. 

S.  Francesco.  Part  of  a tomb  called 
dei  Greci. 

583. 

Cathedral.  Panels  (sixteenth  century). 

514,  515,  516. 

VENICE. 

S.  Maria  Gloriosa  dei  Frari.  Panels. 

517  to  528. 

SS.  Giovanni  e Paolo.  Panels  and 
other  fragments  of  ornament. 

572' 

S.  Maria  dei  Miracoli.  Pilaster  from 
the  choir  arch. 

ITALIAN  RENAISSANCE  ORNAMENT 


175 


571. 


S.  Maria  dei  Miracoli.  Capital  from 
another  pilaster. 


536-543- 


S.  Maria  dei  Miracoli.  Various  orna- 
ment. 


529-535- 


S.  Michele  on  Cemetery  Island. 
Various  ornament. 


544-5 5°>  567. 

574»  579- 
449  -1- 


Palace  of  the  Doges.  Various  orna- 
ment. 


Palace  of  the  Doges.  Coat  of  arms 
of  the  Barberigo  family  over  a door  in 
the  rear  of  the  palace. 


512,  513- 


S.  Marco.  Detail. 


Unnumbered:  Various  fragments  of  ornament  in  the  style  of  the  Ital- 
ian Renaissance. 

Of  the  casts  described  above  the  following  are  gifts  from  various 
donors  : Nos.  119,  120,  124,  and  126  to  131,  from  C.  C.  Perkins  (1876)  ; 
No.  295,  from  Mrs.  Andrew  C.  Wheelwright  (1877)  ; No.  885,  from  Dr. 
William  Sturgis  Bigelow  (1881)  ; No.  897,  from  Thomas  R.  Gould  (1881); 
No.  905,  from  the  Trustees  of  the  Metropolitan  Museum,  New  York 
(1884);  No.  162,  from  Charles  G.  Loring  (1885);  No.  400.3,  from  the 
Royal  Academy  of  Fine  Arts,  Ravenna,  Italy  (1889)  ; Nos.  41 2.1  and 
124.M,  from  A Class  of  Young  Ladies  (1889  and  1891);  No.  400,  from 
Miss  Mary  Amory  Greene  (1890);  Nos.  400.5  and  449.1,  from  Denman 
W.  Ross  (1890,  1892)  ; No.  449.0,  from  A.  W.  Longfellow,  Jr.  (1893)  ; 
No.  458,  from  Miss  Alice  A.  Gray  (1895)  5 Nos.  449  and  450,  from  Quincy 
A.  Shaw  (1896).  The  figures  of  Night  and  Day  in  No.  614  are  loaned 
by  the  Boston  Athenaeum,  and  Nos.  139  and  914  by  the  Massachusetts 
Institute  of  Technology. 


INDEX  OF  PLACES 


BERLIN 

Royal  Museum 

Bust  of  a Young  Woman  (called  a Princess  of  Urbi- 

no) ; attributed  to  Desiderio  da  Settignano 

Bust  of  a Woman  (formerly  called  Marietta  Strozzi) ; 

in  the  style  of  the  Fifteenth  Century 

BRUGES 

Church  of  Notre  Dame 

Group  of  Madonna  and- Child;  Michel  Angelo  . . 
ENGLAND 

Collection  of  Lord  Wemyss 

Bust  in  Relief  called  St.  Cecilia;  attributed  to  Do- 
natello   

FIESOLE 

Cathedral 

Bust  of  Bishop  Salutati  ; Mino  da  Fiesole  .... 
FLORENCE 

Accademia  delle  Belle  Arti 

Relief  of  the  Madonna  and  Child;  attributed  to 

Andrea  della  Robbia 

Head  from  the  Colossal  Statue  of  David  ; Michel 
Angelo 

Baptistery 

Eastern  Doors  ; Lorenzo  Ghiberti 

Cathedral 

Three  Reliefs  of  the  Miracles  of  St.  Zenobius  ; 

Lorenzo  Ghiberti 

Relief  of  St.  Augustine  ; Luca  della  Robbia  . . . 


Page 

IOI 

128 

148 

65 

116 

88 

M5 

30 

47 

78 


INDEX  OF  PLACES 


1 77 


Cathedral  Museum 

Ten  Reliefs  of  Singing,  Playing,  and  Dancing 
Youths  and  Children;  Luca  della  Robbia  . . . . 

Church  of  San  Lorenzo 

New  Sacristy:  Tombs  of  the  Medici;  Michel  An- 
gelo   

Old  Sacristy : Relief  of  a Lion’s  Head  ; attributed  to 
Donatello  

Church  of  Santa  Croce 

Sarcophagus  with  Two  Attendant  Genii;  Desi- 

derio  da  Settignano . . 

Church  of  Or  San  Michele 

Interior:  Two  Reliefs  from  the  Tabernacle;  Or- 
cagna 

The  Marriage  of  the  Virgin  : the  Annunciation  . . . 

Exterior:  Relief  of  St.  George  and  the  Dragon; 

Donatello 

Hospital  of  the  Innocents 

Fafade : Four  Reliefs  of  Infants;  Andrea  della 

Robbia 

Court:  Relief  of  the  Annunciation;  Andrea  della 

Robbia 

Loggia  di  S.  Paolo 

Relief  of  the  Meeting  of  St.  Francis  and  St. 
Dominic  ; Andrea  Della  Robbia 

Museo  Nazionale 

Relief  of  the  Sacrifice  of  Abraham  ; Lorenzo  Ghi- 
berti   

Statue  of  St.  George;  Donatello 

Statue  of  David  with  the  Head  of  Goliath  ; Dona- 
tello   

Bust  in  Relief  of  St.  John  the  Baptist  as  a Boy; 

Donatello 

Relief  of  the  Nativity  ; Rossellino 

Bust  of  Matteo  Palmieri  ; Rossellino 

Bust  of  a Soldier  in  Armor  ; Antonio  Pollaiuolo 


68 

157 

65 

100 

22 

55 

84 

85 

87 

29 

55 

61 

64 

96 

98 

104 


178 


INDEX  OF  PLACES 


Bust  of  a Young  Man  ; formerly  attributed  to  Pollaiuolo, 

now  thought  to  be  by  Verrocchio 105 

Statue  of  David;  Verrocchio 108 

Panel  from  the  Tomb  of  Francesca  Tornabuoni  ; 

Verrocchio hi 

Bust  of  Rinaldo  della  Luna;  Mino  da  Fiesole  . . 115 

Bust  of  Pietro  Mellini;  Benedetto  da  Maiano  ...  120 

Relief  of  an  Allegorical  Figure  of  Faith  ; Matteo 

Civitali 123 

Bust  of  St.  John  the  Baptist  as  a Boy;  Style  of  the 

Fifteenth  Century 126 

Bust  of  an  Unknown  Woman,  veiled;  Style  of  the 
Fifteenth  Century 127 


Palazzo  Vecchio 

Statue  of  a Cupid  holding  a Dolphin;  Verrocchio  109 
LILLE,  FRANCE 

Palais  des  Beaux  Arts 

Bust  of  a Young  Woman  ; Style  of  the  Fifteenth  Century  133 
LONDON 

Burlington  House 

Relief  of  the  Madonna  and  Child  with  St.  John; 


Michel  Angelo 143 

Victoria  and  Albert  Museum  ; South  Kensington 

Relief  of  Christ  mourned  by  Cherubs  ; Donatello  . 63 

Bust  of  a Monk  (called  Savonarola) ; Style  of  the  Fif- 
teenth Century 128 

LUCCA 

Cathedral 


Recumbent  Effigy  of  Ilaria  del  Carretto;  Jacopo 


della  Quercia 25 

NEW  YORK 

Metropolitan  Museum 

Relief  of  the  Assumption  ; attributed  to  Andrea  della 

Robbia 89 

PADUA 

Madonna  dell’  Arena 

Statue  of  the  Madonna  and  Child  ; Giovanni  Pisano  20 


INDEX  OF  PLACES 


79 


Recumbent  Effigy  of  Enrico  Scrovegno  ; Style  of 

Giovanni  Pisano 

Church  of  S.  Antonio  (II  Santo) 

Twelve  Reliefs  of  Singing  and  Playing  Cherubs  ; 
Donatello 

PARIS 

Dreyfus  Collection 

Bust  of  a Boy  ; attributed  to  Desiderio  da  Settignano 

Louvre 

Bust  of  John  the  Baptist  as  a Boy  ; Mino  da  Fiesole 

Bust  of  Filippo  Strozzi  ; B.  da  Maiano 

Bust  of  an  Unknown  Woman;  Style  of  the  Fifteenth 

Century 

Head  from  one  of  the  Two  Statues  of  Captives 
designed  for  the  Tomb  of  Pope  Julius  II;  Michel 
Angelo 

PISA 

Baptistery 

Relief  of  the  Adoration  of  the  Magi  ; Niccolo  Pi- 
sano   

PISTOIA 

Church  of  S.  Giovanni  fuor  Ci vitas 

Group  of  the  Visitation;  attributed  to  Luca  della 
Robbia 

PRATO 

Cathedral 

Relief  of  Dancing  Cherubs  ; Donatello 

RAVENNA 

Accademia  delle  Belle  Arti 

Recumbent  Effigy  of  Guidarello  Guidarelli  ; Style 
of  the  Fifteenth  Century 

ROME 

Church  of  S.  Pietro  in  Vincoli 

Statue  of  Moses  ; Michel  Angelo 

SIENA 

Cathedral 

Pulpit  ; Niccolo  Pisano 

Holy  Water  Basin  ; Antonio  Federighi 


21 

62 

101 

117 

120 

128 

154 

7 

80 

59 

130 

149 

9 

92 


i8o 


INDEX  OF  PLACES 


Baptistery 

Relief  of  John  the  Baptist  before  Herod;  Lo- 
renzo Ghiberti 29 

Relief  of  Herod’s  Feast;  Donatello 57 


(Cbe  jfttoerjibe 

Electrotyped  and  printed  by  H . O.  Houghton  <5^  Co. 
Cambridge,  Mass.,  U.  S.  A. 


ARRANGEMENT  OF  CASTS  IN  THE  ITALIAN 
RENAISSANCE  ROOM 


